

* <v v 'b <j- v «/.. * ' / <s' s £' J . v- -o 

Y^/aAV * ’ o4^>o°; >Aa^ 



^ <3? ^ o 

^77»‘ " 


1 a v <a » 

s — .v VI. W “1 /X?'Qn'J” A> <x v vC* 

,^> V%\ ft o e< 4 a 

-5-° . t. s ^'“o ’•■* ^ c o»c, <t 
O * Aa’tffe** o .A -* 


K 0 * ,oA tMis: as .a&o* A, :lpf» ^ •»= iwif; 

5^*,. .. Y><<Y.< * .&•»*& • * YY° k aYYaYY $ 

>> j ~ - .\>>. J o .S4 * \VA _ ^fiiiA 0 .^Ak o 


* vv 
O l 

*.^ A, 0 . 



A y A 


c A-A „ 

« ,^-v ? 
* <& ^ 0 
■*■ X). 


ov 
>p<) 


> “ c ^ „o r o, 

.«•■•*,S c?v;aa*< 

* ^A.'. \ A <? * 

o * V*Cr * 

• ^ • 


i«, 1 1 ■ ,V °aa aa'A»= fAp^ o-°!« »..v--v 

*' Vk ?g§£\ V A *' 

* HSS^s’ 5 * rJ&mS£ _ » itv ' r 4.~‘Z%}ligf 1 ■£■ » 

V?* * * 3 aYY<aY * o.V*" **Vt* * * vC*./A >-' 1 ’ -a/A» ^\** , " 0 V ? 

V a j ^ 2 ' 

Kj_ O V\J >3t*W t^y v> 

\" -' 

1 a A 4; 



• 0 ^- ,1*0, V''’"VA** 

* -’—v V * 

aVA J o ^J?r Z 



•W/A 5 “‘ ; ** v \ mAAlw ** v \ : 

i'° * % y.^:S; * * 0°%^S° ’ ‘ ’ %^S°' "A'm£*' 

</„.*> ^ smzZ>n>* 4>. ^ ^ o 


0 


^ ^VV/K o ^ * S§&h*<, % r& +S ^Al p ^ ^ ^ r v ^jAW/h, o ' 


* o 


W 



F< fr > 

’vTS 


» i^v ? 

^ 'A') 

* -3r <K 


r O u % 



> % . 

" . 4 ^ 

^ A ^ 

.‘V coNG^ 4? 


/ ^ etoft??*, 4 O 

'if, <i K 

_.._ „ - „ _„_»- Ao % <• 

° ». 9 ^> 0 ^ « 

^ v. *■***-*- *■ ^ ■* A *• - R ^- ' 


% 4 sP ' 

\ V-V o 

» <£\ l 

«K 

A , l i a . 4 ; 


c?>W% ( 

w ?^&*. *w . 

" aa> ^ 






O 



y A 

,0' ^.•"..V" 1 oA., 


^ V % 

^ s& * 
° V*v O 

o o 

* ^ 0 

jy o. 

.d J > , “*', 1 '' 

!f, A t *«%*•* 

T /-0 o 
”, 



% #> DHO° A C 
^,. K o o x 


‘frc? ^ 

^ % 

\° 0 

: V o^;\ 0 . 

O - 

^o° V* 

0 v * 


s v ^ v «?H\\W "b 

» o^ s , . , \, * 0 » 0 0 -r 

- ^ % oA ^ 

° V*v O r 4pc^ 

,S S ^ oWf; aVA j 0 
.V 'Ak O A. *y v* 


❖ c\ 

A V .v ^ 

^ 'S'r, tV 


* ’ ’ 0°'>4^! tb o° ’ 

” ,n *v:.• • f *\r k °V‘°»■■ *.#*»«v 

% -'A'. ^ ^ *■ A 



r > 


VV 




« ^"A AW/ /\ \W; a v \ AW/ 5 - 

• ‘/.oV * * s » ^,\'° 8 .,v • • % 

* n & sMsh* %.<$ tmz** *o& °M&\ \# :&§&*• 


<y A, 


AA 


A-l'r 



'OV 


V 0 ^, 


Ao' 


<» O 


O A A^w ^ o ' \ ^ 

v - - »* Av* ONO AA ,-r 8 • 

" 'A', A/ * 


>.»,• ^ y % . €W» ^ \ °oiW.‘ & % ‘JSm? * %, °M 

..A; • ‘>A'°" c */V ” 0 °^” A*^V * l vA^- c ’,V * • 

A. °.. ^ A, ,.° i*Mx\ J .. ^ ♦•jssuAl v, ,.° ZMfof*. °.. 


v°^, 


:'flj^ T : >o/Y 

,, .. <^,o^ • ° V 0 ^, - 

■>n,.. .. f \«*/ t ,. 

" ,, " i ’; fgg£i\%<f fMjfol %^ o 

> -<a ^ * v $%r + -v ^ > syamr* r ?y a 



-.W. ^ « 

0 % s& C° N C 4 M 

V- .1 * • YgY 8 °a/^ * •/v**’ *' v 

° v-^ O 

„ AA J o c3^r Z 

A, ^..-' ■".•> Ti * <A. 




<f Af x --^y' 
ft <* /V 
1 



J ,P. 


o 

4 « c A . 

44° * '* 4 




^ *T 

,4* G° Ng * 

.O* O _~*v« 



«,.« JJa %, m° 4\ \w** ^ v \ \W/4\ w- * 

:%V • l > • • ^*"*.\'” * ‘^o.».. # v < * • *>°. : l ; **,\'° • A 

^. 

xp# -IPils zSmkr %<? :mm\ ^ 'Mm° ^ 

^ ♦;».>> •‘*V ■ 

'w. 0 < 

vf> « 

*>0 ft 


i^ V #;/\w; a v \ m*/\* : ^ v \ • 
cvv * • ^<^>o • >4i4v * * o°t^>o'° • i :>>a^- 

sSs&i * n & o\si«v» .sms** + n <* s^mt' 


- - —_„ ov 

<t> 0 ^' l. i fe‘; 'S° “ 5?^ 

v a? cv »«* _o K 

AV ” ° r,, ^ c , * ° M °%T ^*o» V 

* <V vf 

11 », ~4'„'° • 1 * A* 


. %<? 

; , 

»v °, * 



cP^j' 

* ,v > 




t^oj ° ’ 1 

*; W •*«.<$ -'■o^®- 


»P<i 


O }> 

- .' o* 'V* 

■po 0 -5-° ,„. V,A 

^ ' 
xcS> * 


S ’ /•£" 

4 o4 ■•'*•> 

V. c° <•* 

V*CT ft 

>5»^ ; 44r4444 * • 44^ 

* ^ : |p|| | .*Jpgl * XJ> 

'j. 'W*'* ^ V 5 < s< ’ J ^v 4 ^ v '^, 

X \fy.s a <, *Jt» »' ,<?■ \ *;/ vV x 

iV /.i ,, ' l! l ’•'*’. ^ * 

- *b^ .°<^a* 

*?• 




s>" 

h, o ^ ««r V> -«V ^ ° ^ 

%S eSPitt 


- o. 
,<■'■•>> \ 


■J XS»-^« * - z Z^ms, • S H 

X *S$rt J?*x VW^** \ # -«s®5rx v 

’•*'*% ’ ‘Vtc^^o 0 ’ ’ * o4 

, <3' °* 

c « %<£> ?$mm ° 4-4 


, ^ V5 
, y o , }.•*“ X s 

^ n/yi* “t 0. ^ CONG, 

v l^p; A4 

».-, »^* - * -!V”“’/»' * o,v*" *' 

° % x>v ^ ^ rA rw/Vi o ^ ^ 

i v^ » SHik r %■& ?MM/A °. A A 

° o 

A» 


# v \ % 

-4 / fy -vjrv s V 

V°o ' .^ s . t °" c *p < ?e *• V 

; ■ y 0v^ o'/^Skt - 


r O s' 




. \ ft 


❖ " z, ^ O 



. V ^ C\ 

«/ jfe: \/ 

^\^P/ # v \ W/AIW ^ v \ #//\\m ; 

^ v . * * SK^°y^ 44*”»^ v 4.. Kf^ a ^ * *’ 

* /Jfe ; \s^ / s&fQC'r Xf /kM** * 

v * * ’/^v ’ 4^4° ’ > S ^4V ”' 5 -* ■ *' l,,> 

; ^-o^ *§m§*i, *of :<w&X *Bmi\ W „°^j&''. 

<? ,0 ' ,0 ’ o '5- ^H.o,W‘ , ••'' , .s^ ,*»> -ti-s *= , “ 0 ’^- ^ * 

» ^ Tz< aT 0, 

* #i£% " <5r^ 



o «o• 


4 • ’ ’ 4^;;4v 44^:4 


r /-0 


s X'X, ym$s/*x 

o w ^ ^ 

^ fc 


44 

4 <4 °o. 

'■•" v-Vr^A 

</«o o 


4 - 


* 44 s f 

4 ^Wau o ^ >9 fjsttbk*' v 

•j^r c4 ^ 0 vv <- <•, 


^ <> 

^4- C/O N G ^ 


4 


7 . t 
o 1 

r K o 'H/^?k\N' A, 

<j ’ rS~ v>v » ts & 4 . ^ 

V '.* ^ i> s \p , . •/o „ k" 4 V s 

*-- #< »\ o°4m4o 4- 

«> Ao o o OV 

0 44 * o x °^j 

>■'■ 4-^4<o4-o>V- 

?> & j V'v* 4 

© 44 o 0 \r„,4 



c_ .0 














































































NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month 
Seminar Series No. 6 

r j 

San Francisco Bayu^ * 
Issues, Resources, 
Status, and Management 


October 1987 



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

NOAA Estuarine Programs Office 












^rC\ONAL 


NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month 
Seminar Series No. 6 



San Francisco Bay: 
Issues, Resources, 
Status, and Management 


Edited by David M. Goodrich 

Proceedings of a Seminar 
Held November 22, 1985 
Washington, D.C. 


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Clarence J. Brown, Acting Secretary 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

J. Curtis Mack II, Acting Under Secretary 

NOAA Estuarine Programs Office 

Virginia K. Tippie, Director 



Q f-l Sfe 

\°i% 1 








Si- Loj 


San Francisco Bay 


Environmental Status and Management 
of Living Resources 


an 

ESTUARY-0F-THE-MONTH 
SEMINAR 

presented 
at the 

U.S. Department of Commerce 
14th & Constitution Avenue 
Main Auditorium 
Washington, DC 

November 22, 1985 


sponsored 

by 

THE NOAA ESTUARINE PROGRAMS OFFICE 

and 

THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 
















EDITORS PREFACE 


The following are the proceedings of a seminar on San Fran¬ 
cisco Bay held on November 22, 1985, at the Herbert C. Hoover 
Building of the U.S. Department of Commerce in Washington, D.C. 
It was one of a continuing series of "Estuary-of-the-Month" 
seminars sponsored by the NOAA Estuarine Programs Office (EPO), 
held with the objective of bringing to public attention the 
important research and management issues in our Nation's estu¬ 
aries. To this end, the seminar first presented an overview of 
the Bay by senior scientific investigators, followed by an 
examination of management issues by leaders of planning and 
regulatory agencies involved in the Bay. 

We would like to acknowledge the assistance of Dr. Michael 
Josselyn of the Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies, San 
Francisco State University, who had principal responsibility for 
assembling the speakers. Dr. Josselyn's cooperation in produc¬ 
ing these proceedings and his experience with the Bay and its 
people have been invaluable to us. The seminar series was or¬ 
ganized by Dr. James P. Thomas of the EPO, with the assistance 
of other members of the EPO staff. Word processing for these 
proceedings was done by Janet Davis. 

David M. Goodrich 

NOAA Estuarine Programs Office 

Washington, D.C. 


v 



























































































V 






SAN FRANCISCO BAY 

ISSUES. RESOURCES. STATUS, AND MANAGEMENT 

Table of Contents 


Page 


Editor's Preface v 

-David M. Goodrich 

Congressional Views: 

-Statement of Congressman Barbara Boxer 1 

-Statement of Congressman Norman D. Shumway 3 

-Statement of Congresswoman Sala Burton 7 

Introduction to the San Francisco Bay Estuary 9 

-Michael Josselyn 

Estuarine Circulation and Mixing 21 

-Roy A. Walters 

Interannual Variability in Dissolved Inorganic 33 


Nutrients in Northern San Francisco Bay Estuary 
(abstract) 

-David H. Peterson, Richard E. Smith, 

Stephen W. Hagar, Dana D. Harmon, 

Raynol E. Herndon, and Laurence E. Schemel 

The Impact of Water Diversions on the River-Delta- 35 

Estuary-Sea Ecosystems of San Francisco Bay 
and the Sea of Azov 

-Michael A. Rozengurt, Michael J. Herz 
and Michael Josselyn 

Thermal Dynamics of Estuarine Phytoplankton: 63 

A Case Study of San Francisco Bay (abstract) 

-James E. Cloern, Brian E. Cole, 

Raymond L.J. Wong, and Andrea E. Alpine 

Benthic Ecology and Heavy Metal Accumulation 65 

-Frederic H. Nichols 

Agency Cooperation and Fishery Studies 
in San Francisco Bay 
-Perry L. Herrgesell 


69 






77 


The Impact of Estuarine Degradation and Chronic 
Pollution on Populations of Anadromous Striped 
Bass (Morone saxatilis ) in the San Francisco 
Bay-Delta, California: A Summary 

-Jeannette A. Whipple, R. Bruce McFarlane, 
Maxwell B. Eldridge, and Pete Benville, Jr. 


Sublethal Effects of Contaminants on the Metabolism 107 

of Metals and Organic Compounds in the Bay Mussel 
-Florence L. Harrison and John P. Knezovich 

Scientific Information and Management Policy for the 125 

Delta-San Francisco Bay Ecosystem 

-Michael J. Herz and Michael A. Rozengurt 

Shoreline Management 137 

-Alan R. Pendleton 

The Federal Role in the Management of San Francisco Bay 149 
-Betsy Coombs 

California Regional Water Quality Control Board 155 

San Francisco Region 
-Roger B. James 


vm 




CONGRESSIONAL VIEWS: 

STATEMENT OF CONGRESSWOMAN BARBARA BOXER 


During my career as an elected official, I have always 
served constituents who live on and around San Francisco Bay 
and for whom the Bay is a symbol of environment values. During 
these years, I have watched with alarm as Bay fill, pollution, 
and water diversions contributed to the gradual decline of the 
largest estuary on the West Coast, one of this country's most 
valuable national resources. 

Since coming to Congress two and one-half years ago, I have 
sponsored legislation which would protect the Bay and adjacent 
coastal waters, and I have fought to retain the National Marine 
Fisheries Service Tiburon Laboratory and its critical research 
on the effects of pollutants on striped bass and other fish. I 
am a strong supporter of the Clean Water Act, especially the 
amendment which would provide much needed funds for improved 
information gathering and management of the Bay. 

I am delighted the San Francisco Bay is the Estuary-of-the- 
Month because such designation is an acknowledgement of concern 
over the status of our Bay. NOAA's Estuarine Programs Office 
and the EPA are performing an important public service by 
bringing this excellent group of Bay researchers and managers 
here to talk about the Bay's problems and by soliciting input on 
solutions from Congress and other estuarine experts. 

I look forward to an informative and productive day and I am 
prepared to offer my support to assist in implementing any sug¬ 
gestions which are designed to enhance San Francisco Bay. 


1 
































































CONGRESSIONAL VIEWS: 

STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN NORMAN D. SHUMWAY 


I thought this morning I would like to focus my remarks on 
three topics that are related to San Francisco Bay. One, of 
course, is the coastal zone mechanism which California and the 
Bay Area have developed to conquer problems in the San Francisco 
Bay and ensure the success of that program. Secondly, is how 
these programs begin to relate to activities outside of the 
Bay's legal coastal zone. Thirdly, how the general experience 
of the San Francisco Bay management can be used as an example 
for other estuaries of national significance and more 
specifically, what Congress has done recently. 

Recognizing generally that there is a national interest in 
the effective management, the beneficial use and protection, and 
development of a coastal zone, Congress, in 1972, passed the 
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). The Federal program was set 
up to encourage coastal states to develop their own individual 
coastal management programs which accounted for national 
interest and policies and to have these programs approved by the 
Federal Government. 

As you all may know, there are two basic incentives for a 
coastal state to participate. These are, Federal funds to 
coastal states to help develop and implement management 
programs, and the consistency program which is a Federal 
assurance that Federal activities directly effecting the coastal 
zone will be provided to the maximum extent practicable and 
consistent with approved state management programs. These two 
incentives have been successful in getting 28 of the 35 coastal 
states and territories to obtain Federally-approved management 
programs. As a result of this achievement, the House of 
Representatives, in June of this year, passed HR-2121 to 
authorize Federal programs through the year 1990. 

California has adopted a coastal zone management program and 
incorporated a San Francisco Bay Plan into this program. Also, 
as part of this program, an independent state agency was 
created, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development 
Commission, which we will refer to as BCDC. It is an agency 
which is dedicated to the implementation of the Bay plan. All 
of this, of course, is to achieve comprehensive bay management, 
very fitting for the uniqueness of that resource. 

In my mind, there are three significant advantages which the 
CZMA lends to such an estuary management effort which guarantees 
the success of the Bay plan's comprehensive approach, the 
emphasis on state and regional responsibilities as the principal 
managers, and the consultation ability which CZMA's consistency 


3 




provision provides. With regard to the first advantage, water 
quality, recreational uses, air quality, shoreline growth, and 
landslide activities are all related and should be managed as 
such. 

I think one of the aspects of the overall management of the 
estuary would ensure a certain degree of inefficiency. For 
example, as you probably know, early Federal efforts to manage 
the Chesapeake Bay were largely ineffective because they 
isolated only one aspect of estuarine management; in this case, 
the Chesapeake Bay's water quality. Now, to combat that 
approach, the EPA and the surrounding states are looking at the 
factors involved in Chesapeake Bay water quality degradation. 
They are looking at agricultural runoff, urban runoff, and other 
landslide activities and not just at industrial sources. As a 
result, we have a comprehensive approach which, I think all will 
agree, is more effective than the initial approach. 

With regard to the second advantage, it is most appropriate 
that state, regional, and local officials be the principal 
authors of any specific estuary management plan. The 
appropriate rule under the CZMA is to provide limited grants to 
assist in that effort, provide guidelines and technical 
assistance relative to national interests, and to approve a plan 
on development and implementation. 

With regard to the third advantage, Federal consistency, in 
the San Francisco Bay Plan has been implemented through a 
consistency procedure and jurisdiction granted to the BCDC. The 
relevant California state law, that is McAteer-Petris Act, has 
been approved by NOAA pursuant to the CZMA, as part of 
California's Federally-approved Coastal Management Program. 

BCDC has authority over all areas of the Bay, extending 
landward 100 feet, including Suisun Marsh and the surrounding 
wetlands. Permits are required for practically all work 
involving fill from the driving of a single pile to the 
development of larger scale projects. Permits are issued only 
if the proposed work is consistent with the McAteer-Petris Act 
and the Bay Plan. 

Let me give to you an example of what I think is good co¬ 
operation in the implementation of the Bay Plan. That is the 
relationship of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the BCDC. 
Obviously, there are competing uses for the Bay and the shore¬ 
line. Probably the most critical has to be resolved in managing 
the Bay. Since the Corps has permitting authority for all 
proposals and the CZMA requires consistency certification for 
such a Corps permit where activities are within the legal coast¬ 
al zone, the Corps simply recognizes a BCDC permit as a consis- 


4 


tency certification. With regard to jurisdiction, BCDC uses its 
consistency authority to work with the appropriate local, state, 
and Federal agencies conducting activities that could effect the 
Bay. 


For example, with regard to water quality matters, BCDC has 
used this consistency provision as a comment authority on the 
regional water quality award. Through their permitting process, 
BCDC can actually enforce state water quality regulations. It 
has been critical that BCDC and other effected agencies 
recognize the legal limitation of the consistency provision. 
Consistency should not be misconstrued as a state or local veto 
over Federal matters, but rather as a mechanism designed to 
promote state/Federal consultation and resolutions wherever 
practicable on matters of mutual or conflicting issues. 

In Congressional activities relating to estuary management 
in general, both the House and the Senate have passed legisla¬ 
tion to reauthorize the Clean Water Act. Included in both of 
these bills are proposals for a National Estuary Program. These 
proposals allow for a state governor to nominate estuaries which 
are deemed to be of national significance to be included in this 
program. If the EPA administrator concurs with that nomination, 
a Congressional Committee is convened comprised of Federal, 
state, and local officials to develop a water quality regulatory 
program for those estuaries which have national significance. 

Certain members of the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Com¬ 
mittee leadership, including Chairman Jones, are interested in 
broadening the scope of these programs and shifting their focus 
to develop an overall management program as opposed to programs 
specifically limited to water quality. These broad regulatory 
programs will then be forwarded to the state CZMA plan. 

I believe there is some merit in this Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries Committee approach. Certainly, the more comprehensive 
the management framework and more of the state and local role in 
estuarine programming is increased, the more appropriate and 
effective, I believe, the management will be. 

However, as we have seen in the case of the San Francisco 
Bay, the Federal mechanism in the form of CZMA is already in 
place. I believe it promotes a comprehensive estuary management 
regime. 

We are seeking ways to cut Federal spending. Reduction 
mechanisms are being seriously considered by Congress. I think 
it is going to be hard to justify a new program for management 
of estuaries, even those that have national significance. I 
believe that maybe a more appropriate method of encouraging 


5 


states to use the CZMA will be simply to amend the 1977 Act to 
outline national interests for specific management plans for 
estuaries of national significance as part of the Federally ap¬ 
proved coastal management programs, as San Francisco, I believe, 
has already done. 

The San Francisco Bay has provided examples. Example 1 is 
that CZMA worked. Example 2 is that it has influence, which 
certainly effected its own strength and legal confines and is 
felt in surrounding areas as well. I think it also provides 
comprehensive and overall management to a resource which is 
valuable to all of us as Americans and certainly to those of us 
who are Californians. 

Obviously, Congress does not yet have answers to all the 
challenges that we face. I think we are going to be looking to 
people such as you to provide recommendations and guidance for 
our actions and activities in the future. I look forward to 
that kind of product coming from you and from this conference 
and I look forward to working with you in the months and years 
ahead. Thank you. 


6 


CONGRESSIONAL VIEWS: 

STATEMENT OF CONGRESSWOMAN SALA BURTON 


Estuaries in the surrounding California marshes and life 
carrying tributaries are unique ecosystems of great value to man 
and nature. Yet, for too long, estuaries have been regarded as 
useless resevoirs for municipal and industrial waste. 

More than 100 acres of estuarine habitat have been lost 
nationwide since 1960 and estuaries around the country have been 
considered ecologically. One of those estuaries is of great 
concern to me and happens to be the largest estuary on the West 
Coast, San Francisco Bay, and it's in serious trouble. The 
striped bass population has plummeted 80 percent in the past two 
decades. Salmon, trout, shad, and crab populations have also 
seriously declined. High concentrations of toxics have been 
found in the Bay and is the highest ever recorded in scientific 
literature. Ninety-five percent of the Bay's original wetlands 
have been converted to non-wetland use depriving the Bay of re¬ 
quired pollution filtration and wildlife habitat functions. In 
fact, this is a matter I have addressed with the Army Corps of 
Engineers in hope that greater attention will be given to these 
concerns that are so important to the continued health of the 
Bay. 


As you may be aware, I have offered an amendment to the 
Clean Water Act legislation, HR-8, which authorizes development 
of the San Francisco Bay estuarine programming. Since San Fran¬ 
cisco Bay estuarine watershed is the coastal line to the State 
of California, the Bay system does not currently qualify under 
the interstate provision of the national program. The intent of 
this amendment is to develop a management plan for the Bay's 
estuaries which would be similar to the national plan indicated 
under the EPA's estuary program authorized by Section 320 of the 
Clean Water Act. HR-8 has passed the House with this amendment 
in tact but the Senate has not included this language in its 
Clean Water Act. A conference between the House and the Senate 
is expected to convene after the Thanksgiving recess to rectify 
the differences in these bills. We are working very hard to 
make sure that San Francisco Bay is included in the final ver¬ 
sion. 

I am very pleased that this seminar is being held to discuss 
San Francisco Bay and I want to thank you for permitting me to 
speak on this most important issue for San Francisco. Thank 
you. 


7 





















































INTRODUCTION TO THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY ESTUARY 


Michael Josselyn 

Paul F. Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies 
San Francisco State University 

It is a pleasure to welcome our audience to a day-long 
presentation on San Francisco Bay, our Nation's second largest 
estuary and perhaps also its youngest in terms of scientific 
research and understanding. As we shall hear today, San 
Francisco Bay is a key region in the management of California's 
water, and we greatly appreciate the Congressional interest 
given to this important national resource. Currently, the House 
of Representatives has passed an amendment to the Clean Water 
Act which designates a greater role for the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency in managing our Nation's estuaries, and we 
look forward to working with Congress to ensure the San 
Francisco Bay estuary is included in that effort. 

Before I begin my introduction to the San Francisco Bay 
estuary, I would like to acknowledge the support and assistance 
provided by Dr. James Thomas, Acting Director, and the staff of 
the Estuarine Programs Office. We are pleased to be the sixth 
in what is an excellent series of seminars on the Nation's 
estuaries. In addition, I wish to acknowledge the support of 
the agencies of the individual speakers, especially the U.S. 
Geological Survey, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and 
the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9. 

My role is to set the stage for the following speakers. 

Many of the audience may have seen the San Francisco Bay region 
previously; others may have only limited knowledge of its 
history, geomorphology, and the problems. We, as estuarine 
scientists, are not as fortunate as our colleagues along the 
eastern and Gulf coasts of the United States, in that large 
estuaries are a rare phenomena along the precipitous coastline 
of the western United States. More typical are small coastal 
rivers and streams entering the ocean over sand bars with narrow 
coastals marshes behind the dunes. Larger rivers such as the 
Columbia support more extensive estuarine habitats within the 
confines of the river valley. However, only in a few areas have 
the coastal mountains opened to a broad semi-enclosed basin 
which supports typical habitats associated with the estuaries 
environment: tidal marshes, mudflats, and protected open 

water. Coupled with the freshwater inflow from the Sacramento 
and San Joaquin Rivers, the San Francisco Bay basin provides a 
unique physical environment which supports a great number of 


9 



organisms tolerant of fluctuating salinities, temperature, and 
turbidity. Some of the geophysical facts about San Francisco 
Bay and its comparisons with other estuaries are given in Tables 
1 and 2. 

Although estuaries have many qualities and functions in 
common, the San Francisco Bay estuary has many distinctive 
attributes compared to other estuaries in the United States. 

The estuary is actually a continuum of basins, deltas, and 
rivers -- as my fellow scientists at the Romberg Tiburon Center, 
Dr. Michael Rosengurt, refers to as the River-Delta-Estuary-Sea 
system. Two major rivers flow into the basin: the Sacramento 
and the San Joaquin. Together, they drain over 40 percent of 
the State of California (approximately 153,000 km 2 ). Before 
reaching the estuarine portion of the basin (where salt and 
freshwater mix), the two major rivers mix with other tributaries 
with a vast interconnecting maze of channels called the Sacra- 
mento-San Joaquin Delta (Figure 1). The Delta, once the largest 
(over 1,400 km 2 ), is now largely used for farming and recre¬ 
ation. As our speakers will relate, the Delta also represents 
the single most important element in the vast "pipe-work" of 
water conveyance facilities in the state as well as providing 
important spawning and nursery areas for the state's 
recreational fisheries. 

Although many estuaries have variable inflow rates associat¬ 
ed with storms and snowmelt, the annual inflow pattern to the 
San Francisco Bay estuary fluctuates in response to the Mediter¬ 
ranean-type climate: frequent and heavy winter storms followed 
by dry summers. Winter rains result in both immediate local 
runoff and accumulation of water in the snow pack, which later 
melts and results in heavy discharges in April and May. With an 
approximate annual river discharge of 20.9 x 10 2 m 3 , 80-90 
percent enters the estuary from December to April (Figure 2). 

The climate also affects net water budgets due to the greater 
amounts of evaporation occurring in the region evolution of a 
unique marsh ecosystem, sometimes referred to in creation of a 
major business for salt production in large evaporation ponds. 

For those of you who have flown into San Francisco Bay, these 
large multi-hued basins are often the most distinctive landform 
on the approach path. 

Another unique characteristic of the San Francisco Bay 
estuary is the separation of the basin into two major circula¬ 
tory systems. The "North Bay", consisting of Suisan, San Pablo, 
and the northern portion of San Francisco Bay (sometimes re¬ 
ferred to as the "Central Bay") is dominated by a typical estu¬ 
arine gravitational circulation pattern. Freshwater inflow 
meets the bottom-flowing oceanic water in the region between 
Chipps Island in the western Delta and San Pablo Bay depending 
upon the amount of inflow. During the summer, the usual loca¬ 
tion of this interface region is within Suisun Bay, where it is 


10 



Figure 1. Map of San Francisco Bay 
Delta region, the North Bay and the 


showing the 
South Bay. 


11 
















16 





Figure 2. Interannual variation in 
freshwater inflow to San Francisco Bay 
es tuary. 

A. Regulated freshwater inflow as 
measured in the Delta 

B. Salinity change as measured in 
the Central Bay. From Conomos 
et al^ (1985) 

Figure 3. Annual water budget for the 
San Francisco Bay region. The region 
exhibits a net evaporative loss over 
the year with rainfall confined to the 
winter months. From Conomos et al. (1985) 



12 

























































































































Table 1 

Comparisons of San Francisco Bay 
with Other North American Estuaries 



Basin Area 

Surface Area 

Inflow 


(1000 km 2 ) 

(km 2 ) 

(m 3 /s) 

San Francisco Bay 

153 

1240 

500 

Columbia River 

671 

380 

5500 

Fraser River 

203 

- 

2700 

Delaware Bay 

33 

303 

550 

Chesapeake Bay 

166 

11400 

1600 


From Conomos et al. (1985) 


Statistic 


Table 2 

Geostatistics of San Francisco Bay 

Value (x 1C) 9 ) 


Area (mean lower low water) 

1.04 m 

Including mud flats 

1.24 m 

Volume 

6.66 m 

Tidal Prism 

1.59 m 

Average Depth 

6.1 m 

Median Depth 

2.0 m 

Regulated River discharge (annual) 
Delta outflow 

19.0 m 3 

All other streams 

1.9 m 3 


2 

2 

3 

3 


Modified From Conomos et al. (1985) 


13 


referred to as the null zone and has been shown to support a 
significant phytoplankton-zooplankton food web. On the other 
hand, the "South Bay", the portion stretching from the indus¬ 
trial city of South San Francisco to the Silicon Valley of San 
Jose, has little freshwater inflow and functions more like a 
large lagoon. Occasional freshwater cells may move into the 
basin from the North Bay during the winter. In the summer, the 
major freshwater source is treated domestic effluent. 

The Urbanized Estuary 

Flying into San Francisco or viewing the region from space, 
one is impressed with the urban development surrounding the Bay. 
Certainly, the land-use along the edge of the Bay has undergone 
a significant change over the past 170 years; these changes un¬ 
doubtedly have had an influence on the physical, chemical, and 
biological functioning of the estuary. Nichols et al. (1986) 
have written an excellent summary of the changes that have oc¬ 
curred in San Francisco Bay since 1850 and I want to briefly 
summarized their remarks. 

One of the major activities was the diking of "swamp and 
overflowed lands" and subsequent draining of the wetlands for 
agricultural purposes. The greatest loss occurred in the Delta, 
where the entire wetland system was lost due to the construction 
of levees. Small portions of the wetland system can be observed 
today as islets within the river channels and along levee banks. 
However, the increasing trend towards placing a rip-rap on le¬ 
vees and removing vegetation is eliminating even these small 
riparian areas. The tidal salt marshes of the Bay have faired 
only slightly better, with over 85 percent having been diked or 
filled for agricultural, salt, ponds, or urbanization. The 
largest remaining wetland system in the estuary is located 
around Suisun Bay. These wetlands are also diked; however, 
water flow is managed to support habitat to attract waterfowl 
for hunting by the over 150 private duck clubs in the region. 

At the time that wetlands were being diked, another anthro¬ 
pogenic process was imperceptibly building more shallow water 
habitat. To retrieve gold from the foothills, miners used large 
water monitors to wash the overburden and gold-containing sedi¬ 
ment through sluiceways and into rivers, the Delta and, after 
several decades, the Bay. Hydraulic mining was halted in 1884, 
but the redistribution of sediment from rivers to the Bay went 
on for the following half century. In several locations in 
Suisun and San Pablo Bays, new marshlands were created by the 
sediment, and many former deep harbors were silted in. 

The gold of California transplanted many Easterners to the 
Bay region, who brought with them the cultural and culinary 
tastes of their Atlantic upbringing. With the completion of the 
transcontinental railroad, the means to transport entire 


14 



estuarine communities (with the purpose of introducing the 
eastern oyster) became available. Oyster culture in San Fran¬ 
cisco Bay was a major industry, and with it came other mudflat 
organisms. Some were edible, some innocuous, several destruc¬ 
tive (e.g. Teredo , the shipworm). All were aggressive and 
quickly became dominant members of the Bay's fauna. Today, over 
100 species of introduced benthic and intertidal invertebrates 
are found in the Bay as well as fish, plants, and zooplankton. 

One of the most popular introduced species is the striped bass 
which, as will be described by Dr. Whipple later this morning, 
has also become the Bay's "miner canary" in that its recent 
decline may be a warning of a system pushed beyond its natural 
resilience. 

While the marshes were being filled and new species 
introduced, another activity began in the Central Valley and 
southern California which would have an impact on the Bay -- 
irrigated agriculture. The demand for water for the arid south 
brought political and economic pressures for state and Federal 
water projects to redirect water from the Bay to other uses. 
Although water flow varies considerably from year-to-year, the 
loss of freshwater inflows is evident, amounting to 40-60 
percent of the natural flows in recent years (see Rozengurt, 
this proceedings). Much of the diverted water is taken from the 
spring flows, an important period for some spawning fish. 
Furthermore, the water from Sacramento Valley (which receives 7 0 
percent of the state's runoff) must pass through the strategi¬ 
cally located Delta before reaching the pumping facilities at 
Tracy. The Delta is not only an important fish habitat, it also 
affects downstream salinity intrusion, sedimentation, and 
flooding. Yet this "sieve", through which freshwater must pass, 
is itself weakening as increasingly, frequent levee failures 
during floods and winter storms occur. 

The discussion of water needs and natural resource require¬ 
ments is always bound to create an argument among farmers, bio¬ 
logists, and public interest groups. Even the Federal and state 
authorities responsible for separate water storage and convey¬ 
ance facilities had no joint operating agreements until 1986. 

The State Water Quality Control Board issued a policy (referred 
to as Decision 1485) to provide for water flows necessary to pro¬ 
tect the beneficial uses of the Delta; the decision is up for 
renewal in 1988. We can expect a great deal of data, interpre¬ 
tation, and emotion at these hearings given the impact such a 
decision can have on the competing demands for water use for 
economic and natural resource protection purposes. 

The reduction in water quantity has been accompanied by a 
reduction in water quality. Fortunately, San Francisco Bay 
recovered from the anoxic events of the 1950s and 1960s as a 
result of improved wastewater treatment and the movement of 
discharge locations to regions of greater flushing. Yet 


15 



population growth has expanded the amount of effluent entering 
the Bay such that the ratio of wastewater to freshwater inflow 
is expected to double by the year 2000. As our technology to 
treat domestic effluent has increased, so has our society's 
ability to produce more toxic materials as both agricultural and 
industrial waste. Some of the highest concentrations of DDT and 
heavy metals among the world's estuaries have been observed in 
the sediments of San Francisco Bay. Organic compounds such as 
PCBs and PAHs are also found in Bay organisms and in some cases 
have been implicated in reproductive failure. 

People visiting the Bay area are sometimes tempted to 
question the impacts of the problems presented this morning. 

The sun rising over wispy fog and blue water presents a wonder¬ 
ful view to the visitor perched on the hills overlooking the 
Bay. The striped bass fisherman, the avid bird watcher, the 
beachcomber seeking shellfish in the mudflats, and the beachgoer 
during summer months, each suffer a small loss of quality in the 
Bay resources. They combine to represent a powerful environ¬ 
mental lobby to protect one of California's most important 
natural resources. 


The Scientific Perspective 

The primary purpose of our seminar is to describe the state 
of our scientific information concerning San Francisco Bay. 
Luckily, I've brought with me individuals far more knowledgeable 
about that topic that I, and I only want to briefly refer to the 
landmarks and "bibles" on San Francisco Bay ecology. 

The early history of discovery and scientific exploration of 
the Bay has been eloquently described by Joel Hedgepeth (1979). 
Science as politics has its backrooms, and Dr. Hedgepeth manages 
to find enough old letters and documents to indict even the 
staid old institutions of Stanford and the University of 
California in a battle over scientific territory. Not only 
scientists, but vaudeville actors like John Reber have played a 
role in stimulating research interest in the estuary. Mr. 

Reber's desire to convert the Bay into a large freshwater re¬ 
servoir provided the impetus to construct the Corps of Engineers 
Hydraulic Model, which has tested Mr. Reber's plan as well as 
many others. A number of Bay-wide studies have been undertaken 
but unfortunately, differences in methodology and changes in our 
understanding of the underlying physical and geological pro¬ 
cesses have limited the usefulness of this store of information. 

This level of effort has yielded a number of significant 
volumes which should be read by all scientists and managers 
responsible for determining the future of research and manage¬ 
ment of the Bay. In 1977, the Pacific Section of the American 
Association for the Advancement of Science held a conference at 
San Francisco State University on San Francisco Bay and in 1979, 


16 



published a volume entitled San Francisco Bay: The Urbanized 
Estuary (Conomos, 1979). This excellent work brings together 
much of the recent work done by the U.S. Geological Survey 
personnel on estuarine circulation, chemistry, and biology. It 
also provides summaries of general geomorphology of the estuary, 
wetland geology and biology, and fisheries resources. A less 
successful volume followed in 1982 as an outgrowth of another 
Pacific Section-sponsored symposium at the University of Califor¬ 
nia at Davis (Conomos et al. 1982). Entitled San Francisco 
Bay: Use and Protection , this book discusses impacts of shore¬ 

line development, sewage treatment, water diversion, and dredg¬ 
ing on the estuary. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in its 
community profile series, sponsored the completion of a profile 
of tidal marshes in San Francisco in 1983 (Josselyn, 1983) and 
has now contracted for profiles on freshwater tidal marshes and 
the soft-bottom benthos. 

The most recent addition to this list of scientific litera¬ 
ture is the book edited by Cloern and Nichols (1985). The pur¬ 
pose of the volume is "to examine the temporal dynamics of [estu¬ 
arine] properties and processes in the San Francisco Bay es¬ 
tuary", in which "temporal" is defined as time scales from tidal 
to interannual. It provides updated information from the U.S. 
Geological Survey work as well as research sponsored by the U.S. 
Bureau of Reclamation, California Department of Fish and Game, 
and California Water Resources Center. In the volume, both the 
individual authors and the editors comment on the areas needing 
further research. 

Areas of Recommended Research Effort 


As I prepared for this presentation, I contacted a number of 
individuals who have or are currently involved in research on 
San Francisco Bay. Most agreed that the work mentioned above 
has provided a sound framework for more detailed scientific 
efforts. It is apparent from the efforts of the U.S. Geological 
Survey and the Four Agencies Ecological Study Program (a group 
comprised of the Department of Fish and Game, Department of 
Water Resources, State Water Quality Control Board and the 
Bureau of Reclamation) that large scale coordinated programs 
have yielded significant data linking physical, chemical, and 
biological processes. At the same time, individual research on 
specific groups or hydrologic cycles has also yielded important 
new information on the estuary. Both levels of effort are 
needed. Table 3 indicates some of the major research needs as 
summarized by Cloern and Nichols (1985) with some additions as 
suggested by my colleagues. 

Research of itself has led to major breakthroughs in our 
understanding of estuarine processes. At the same time, the 
urbanized nature of San Francisco Bay estuary requires that we 
use this research to solve immediate management needs. The next 


17 







Table 3 

Research Priorities for the San Francisco Bay Estuary 

ROLE OF INFLOW ON ESTUARINE PROCESSES 

Circulation and residence times 
Salt balance 

Sedimentation and transport 
Geochemical cycles 
Fisheries resources 

BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES 

Microbial ecology 

Micozooplankton biology 

Role of seasonal and tidal wetlands 

Benthic vegetation: eelgrass and algae 

Scale of temporal variability in biotic communities 

WATER QUALITY 

Long-term monitoring of biotic communities 
Sources and fates of toxics 

Development of new techniques to measure impacts of 
toxics 

Nutrient budgets for the estuary 


Table 4 

Major Management Issues for San Francisco Bay 

Freshwater diversion from Delta and Bay* 

Toxic waste discharge to ground and surface waters* 
Agricultural drainage 
Loss of wetlands* 

Decline of fisheries 

Sea level rise 

Dredging to deepen channels 


*Signifies those issues of high significance. 


18 


several decades will bring significant new stresses on the 
estuarine system which will equal, if not exceed the historic 
human impacts on the region. Table 4 provides a short list of 
these management needs. 


REFERENCES 

Cloern, J.E. and F.H. Nichols, 1985: Time scales and mechanisms 
of estuarine variability, a synthesis from studies of San 
Francisco Bay. In Cloern, J.E. and F.H. Nichols (eds.). 
Temporal Dynamics of an Estuary San Francisco Bay . D.W. 
Junk Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 

Conomos, T.J., R.E. Smith and J.W. Gartner, 1985: Environmental 
setting of San Francisco Bay. In Cloern, J.E. and F.H. 
Nichols (eds.). Temporal Dynamics of an Estuary: San 
Francisco Bay . D.W. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht, The 
Netherlands. 

Hedgepeth, J.W., 1979: San Francisco Bay: The unsuspected 
estuary. In Conomos, T.J. (ed.). San Francisco Bay: The 
Urbanized Estuary . Pacific Div. AAAS, San Francisco, Ca. 

Josselyn, M.N., 1983: The Ecology of San Francisco Bay Tidal 
Marshes: A Community Profile . U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Report No. 
FWS/OBS-83/23. 

Nichols, F.H., J.E. Cloern, S.N. Luoma, and D.H. Peterson, 

1986: The modification of an estuary. Science 231:567-573. 


19 











































ESTUARINE CIRCULATION AND MIXING 


Roy A. Walters 
U.S. Geological Survey 


Abstract 


Tidal-period and low-frequency variations in sea level, 
currents, and mixing processes in the northern and southern 
reaches of San Francisco Bay lead to contrasting characteristics 
and dissimilar processes and rates in these embayments; the 
northern reach is a partially mixed estuary whereas the southern 
reach (South Bay) is a tidally oscillating lagoon (tributary 
estuary) with density-driven exchange with the northern reach. 

The mixed semidiurnal tides are mixtures of progressive and 
standing waves. The relatively simple oscillations in South Bay 
are nearly standing waves, with energy propagating down the 
channels and dispersing into the broad shoal areas. The tides 
of the northern reach have the general properties of a progres¬ 
sive wave but are altered at the constrictions between embay¬ 
ments and gradually change in an upstream direction to a mixture 
of progressive and standing waves. The spring and neap varia¬ 
tions of the tides are pronounced and cause fortnightly varying 
tidal currents that affect mixing and salinity stratification in 
the water column. 

Wind stress on the water surface, freshwater inflow, and 
tidal currents interacting with the complex Bay topography are 
the major local forcing mechanisms creating low-frequency 
variations in sea level and currents. These local forcing 
mechanisms drive the residual flows that, with tidal diffusion, 
control the water replacement rates in the estuary. In the 
northern reach, the longitudinal density gradient drives an 
estuarine circulation in the channels, and the spatial variation 
in tidal amplitude creates a tidally-driven residual circu¬ 
lation. In contrast, South Bay exhibits a balance between wind- 
driven circulation and tidally-driven residual circulation for 
most of the year. During winter, however, there can be suffi¬ 
cient density variations to drive multilayer (2 to 3) flows in 
the channel of South Bay. 

Residence times of the water masses vary seasonally and 
differ between reaches. In the northern reach, residence times 
are on the order of days for high winter river discharge and of 


21 





Figure 1. 


Index Map 


22 













months for summer periods. The residence times for South Bay 
are fairly long (on the order of several months) during summer, 
and typically shorter (less than a month) during winter when 
density-driven exchanges occur. 

The subject that I would like to deal with is circulation 
and mixing in the San Francisco Bay estuary. From an overall 
perspective, perhaps, the physics of an estuary is not quite as 
glamorous as the chemistry and biology. Nonetheless, it is a 
very necessary foundation on which distributions in chemistry 
and biology rest. 

The U.S. Geological Survey initially became involved in 
studies of San Francisco Bay in approximately 1969 through 
investigations in marine geology. They did one of the first 
things to study water movements; that is, they dropped a bunch 
of drifters into the Bay to see where they would go. Immedi¬ 
ately, they were involved in controversy because their findings 
had impact upon possible water deliveries by the California and 
Federal water projects. Since those controversial beginnings, 
we have expanded into a comprehensive research group studying 
aspects of the physics, chemistry, and biology of San Francisco 
Bay. 


What I would like to do now is take you through the present 
understandings of the circulation and mixing in the estuary. 

In the beginning, there was the Ice Age, which had direct 
implications for San Francisco Bay. The most notable thing was 
that water held as ice led to the lowering of sea level by as 
much as 100 meters or so. At this time, the Bay was a river 
plain, cut by several river channels. As sea level rose, the 
drowned river valley became t:he Bay and the relict river chan¬ 
nels became the shipping lanes. 

What I would like to bring to your attention in Figure 1 is 
the deepest part of the Bay. You will see immediately that 
there is a channel that comes entirely down the northern reach 
of the Bay and out through the Golden Gate. There is also a 
channel that starts in the southern end and goes out through the 
opening at the Golden Gate. These are relict river channels. 

Most of the freshwater flow comes down the northern reach -- 
about 90 percent of the total flow into the Bay. The channel 
left from the last ice age made this area; this area was dry at 
one time. The ocean shore was out past the Golden Gate on the 
continental shelf. 

The shoals contrast with the rest of the Bay. The depth is 
of the order of a few meters in the shoals and up to 10-15 met¬ 
ers in the channel, except near the Golden Gate where the depth 
is about 100 meters. 

The bathymetry has a profound affect on the circulation and 
mixing. High current speed tends to occur where the water is 


23 


deep, whereas mixing increases with current speed and with de¬ 
crease in depth. 

Next, I'd like to talk about the actual physical processes 
that drive the circulation. These include the inflow of fresh¬ 
water, the propagation of tides, and other sea level variations 
through the Bay, and wind stress on the water surface. The 
first, the one with the greatest controversy, is the amount of 
freshwater inflow into the upper end of the Bay. At the seaward 
boundary there is saltwater, which is relatively dense, ap¬ 
proximately 2 percent heavier than freshwater. By contrast, 
there is freshwater introduced through the Delta, in through 
Suisun Bay, down through San Pablo Bay, and out through the 
Golden Gate. A good conceptual model of this system is one of a 
partially mixed estuary; that is, salt and freshwater mixed in a 
continuous manner from the Delta down through the Golden Gate in 
the northern reach. South Bay is what is called a tributary 
estuary, that is, like an appendage hanging on to the main 
estuary. In fact, the main estuary determines the type of 
circulations and exchanges that go on there. This is very 
similar to the Chesapeake, for instance. Chesapeake Bay is the 
main stem and there are the tributary estuaries such as the 
Potomac. 

The second physical forcing process is the sea level changes 
at Golden Gate. It's important to separate different time 
scales when you're talking about sea level changes. 

San Francisco Bay, unlike East Coast estuaries, is very much 
dominated by tides. If you were to measure sea level and call 
that the signal, you would find that approximately 95 percent of 
that signal is the tide. The system is essentially dominated by 
tides. But the tides go roaring in and the tides go roaring out 
leaving a small average circulation. This little difference is 
what is important to the long-term effects, that is, seasonal 
patterns and the way the biology responds over the seasonal 
cycles. 

So we can consider sea level to be broken into two frequency 
ranges. One is the tidal period variations, which we'll dispose 
of shortly. The other is what we call the low frequency or 
subtidal variations. Now, in perspective, this would include, 
for example, the 10-day period in the weather that blows up and 
down the coast of California on the continental shelf. It would 
involve storms passing through the system, setting up sea level 
and causing sea level changes. It also can be related to the 
local rise of sea level. 

The third forcing function we should talk about is the wind 
stress on the water surface. We have considered the seaward 
boundary condition, mainly sea level, and the landward boundary 
condition, namely the input of freshwater. We must now examine 
the surface boundary condition, the wind stress. 


The winds in San Francisco Bay, at least in the summer, are 
characterized by very strong diurnal variations; that is, a 
land/sea breeze that is driven by the temperature difference 
between the land and the sea. During the winter, when storms 
come through, this whole pattern is upset, and there are very 
strong winds from the southwest and sometimes from the north¬ 
west. This has a tendency to create perturbations in the cir¬ 
culation, after which time it returns to a more steady rate. 

Let's talk in more detail about tides. The variations in 
sea level at the Golden Gate create a tidal wave which propa¬ 
gates into the Bay. The tidal characteristics between the north 
and south ends of the Bay are quite different. The south end of 
the Bay has what one would call a standing wave; that is, as you 
look at the windward side of a fixed object in the water, you 
would see a reflected wave and an incident wave. These two 
waves propagate against each other, creating a standing wave. 

Now, one characteristic of a standing wave is that the maximum 
velocities occur when the tide is in the midpoint between its 
extreme. 

The characteristics of the tide in the northern region is a 
combination of a standing and a progressive wave; that is, the 
current speed is maximum at the crests and troughs, like wind 
waves on a lake. There is quite a phase lag as the wave propa¬ 
gates up the reach, perhaps three or four hours before it comes 
to Suisun Bay. 

Sea level is, of course, continuous across central San 
Francisco Bay. However, the water currents have a different 
phasing as you traverse the central bay area. What you find is 
that the tide turns first in South Bay and then later in the 
northern reach. For instance, when the tide turns and starts to 
flood, it will change first and start flooding in South Bay be¬ 
cause it changes at the mid-tide level, whereas it's not going 
to change in the northern part until several hours later. Water 
flows out to the northern reach, into the South Bay, while the 
water is starting to flood into Golden Gate. Eventually, the 
water will turn and start propagating up the northern reach. 

What you have is an unusual but very effective way to pump water 
between the north and south reach of the Bay. 

Looking at the tides as they propagate through the Bay from 
the Golden Gate, you can see, if you look at tidal amplitudes, 
that the amplitude of the wave is increased as it goes south, 
which is a characteristic of a standing wave. Phase differences 
here are small, that is, everything happens simultaneously. In 
the northern reach, there is a tendency for local reflections to 
occur, for example, at the eastern end of San Pablo Bay. In 
fact, the phase increases in a monotonic manner up the northern 
reach. The tidal currents in San Francisco Bay are quite large. 
At Golden Gate, there is a constriction, leading to currents of 
up to 5 knots. 


25 


Next consider the salinity distribution. The largest 
freshwater inflows occur in winter and spring. The lowest 
salinity occurs in the upper end of the estuary, in the northern 
reach. You can see this in Figure 2. The first contour on the 
right is for two parts per thousand. You can see salinity is 
depressed into San Pablo Bay, due to the high freshwater in¬ 
flow. In this case, Suisun Bay is becoming more like a river 
than an estuary. 

The salinity near Golden Gate is depressed slightly while 
that in South Bay remains fairly high, again attesting to the 
fact that there is little freshwater inflow into South Bay. 
Typically in summer, you will find that the salinities are very 
much raised in the upper estuary because of the reduction of the 
freshwater inflow. 

I'm going to start at the north end of the estuary, Suisun 
Bay, and come down to Golden Gate, giving an overview of the 
circulation, and then touch upon South Bay. In the upper end of 
the estuary, Suisun Bay, the river input comes from the Delta, 
the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. As the 
rivers comes out through Suisun Bay, you can see the sediment 
pattern as it flows out between the islands and passes the 
reserve fleet on the northwest shore. 

There are two types of circulation. One is a horizontal 
circulation pattern that is more or less uniform in depth and is 
driven by the freshwater flows and by tidal effects. Then in 
the vertical, there is a circulation with dense saltwater 
intruding on the bottom and freshwater flowing out on the 
surface. This is called estuarine circulation. Each of the 
different kinds of circulation causes a different kind of 
mixing. In the case of Suisun Bay, there is a net outflow due 
to freshwater inflow. Because of the small residual tidal 
effect, there is also a net counterclockwise circulation, 
through the islands and up the main channel. And because of the 
estuarine circulation, there are also density currents coming up 
the channel. Figure 3 is a schematic representation of how the 
currents flow. Look in particular at the one called "water 
flow". What you can see is the river coming in from the left, 
more or less uniformly with the depth, while the saltwater flows 
from the ocean on the bottom. There is a mixing zone, which 
usually occurs somewhere in Suisun Bay. There is some mixture 
of this fresh- and saltwater which then flows out as a surface 
layer. In San Francisco Bay, because there's so much tidal 
energy, the water column is well mixed in the vertical. There 
is a horizontal decrease in salinity going up estuary, and you 
still see an estuarine circulation. 


26 



n3 

£ 

fd 

p 

o 

-p 

£ 

•H 

£ 

£ 

p 

£ 

Ti 

4-> 

•H 

£ 

•H 

i—I 

fd 

V) 

• 

m 

o 

i"- 
£ CTi 
0 «—i 
•H 

-P - 
£ U) 

.Q 0 

•H g 
P 0 
-P £ 
0 O 
•H u 
TJ 

e 

iH 0 

rd P 
O M-) 
*H ' ” 

-p 

P 0) 
0) T3 
> O 
•H 
p 

• 0 

CN 

0 P 
P 0 

£ g 
tJ> § 
•H £ 
IP 0 


(UJ) Hid3Q H31VM 


27 



























WATER 


WATER 


DENSITY 



FLOW 



*<‘o-*** 






Figure 3. Schematic of a 
the ocean water on the ri 
on the left. There is a 
ocean flowing up-estuary 
compensating return flow 
from Cloern, 1979. 


density current with 
ght and freshwater inflow 
density current from the 
on the bottom and a 
at the surface. Modified 


28 









1982 


Figure 4. A time series of (A) residual velocity 
(U is the longitudinal component, positive up estuary), 
(B) salinity and (C) salt flux components at a current 
meter station south of San Bruno Shoal in South Bay. 

The current peak around February 16 depicts a density 
current inflow into South Bay during neap tides. Note 
also the rise in salinity and the peak in salt flux 
at the time. From Walters et al., 1985 


29 











The horizontal circulation is in fact a very effective 
mixing mechanism. The point I want to bring out is that mixing 
is very complicated, much more complicated than most East Coast 
estuaries. When you anticipate or plan modifications in the 
estuary, it is really difficult to say with any certainty what 
is going to happen in more than a qualitative sense. 

We skipped over San Pablo Bay, which is very similar to 
Suisun Bay in that there is still a large horizontal, rotating 
residual current. There are the outflowing currents which occur 
at the surface in the channel. There are density currents going 
up the channel. But the density currents are interesting in San 
Pablo Bay, and they're very similar to those in South Bay. So 
I'll point to this example. 

One of the important features here is the shoal area in the 
center of the channel in San Pablo Bay. The density currents 
that come into the Bay are stronger where the water is deeper. 
This density current moves up through the northern reach of the 
Bay. Because the water is so shallow in the center of San Pablo 
Bay, it can't really sustain this density current. What in fact 
happens is that the density current more or less vanishes on the 
shoal, and then re-forms on the other side of the shoal toward 
Carquinez Strait. 

It's really an interesting feature. You might ask yourself 
how the salt is getting past the shoal. Apparently, it's doing 
this by tidal pumping. That is, on the flooding tide, saline 
water flows over the shoal, into the channel. On the ebb, less 
saline surface water flows out over the shoal. So there is a 
tidally induced exchange over the shoal. 

In South Bay, something very similar occurs. Because South 
Bay is a tributary estuary with little freshwater inflow, the 
freshwater has to come from the north end, from Central Bay. 

For most of the year, South Bay is at oceanic salinity. It's 
just sitting there equilibrated with Central Bay. 

During winter, with the big freshwater flows coming down 
from the northern reach, the salinity in Central Bay is de¬ 
pressed and the water in South Bay then drains out as a density 
current. When freshwater inflows decrease, the salinity starts 
to go up in Central Bay; the water in Central Bay then drives 
back into South Bay as a density current in the opposite direc¬ 
tion. There is again the dispersion mechanism of tidal pumping 
over the shoal. 

In fact, +*hat is the big event of the year in South Bay, 
especir-'.^y for mixing. Figure 4 depicts this. After freshwater 
inflow peaks and South Bay salinity is increasing, there is a 
density current being driven into the channel. But because of 
the tide, when there are spring tides, there's a lot of vertical 
mixing, and the currents are very sluggish and slow. During 
neap tides, when the tidal energy is low, there is less vertical 
mixing and the density currents really pick up speed. You can 


30 


see in the top picture, there is a very strong density current 
occurring over the shoal. There is, in this case, mid-level 
outflow similar to that occurring in Baltimore Harbor. 

I'll just say in closing that we are riding a new wave of 
understanding. One of the most important recent events in the 
studies of San Francisco Bay was when NOAA/National Ocean 
Service, with cooperation from USGS, did a sea level and current 
meter survey in 1980. We're at the point now where we're fully 
involved in the interpretation of this data set. For those 
people interested in further information, we have recently 
prepared an article summarizing the current state of under¬ 
standing of circulation and mixing in San Francisco Bay (Walters 
et. al. 1985). 


REFERENCES 


Cloern, J.E., 1979: Phytoplankton ecology of the San Francisco 
Bay system: The status of our current understanding, in 
T.J. Conomos (ed.), San Francisco Bay: The Urbanized 
Estuary . Pacific Division, American Association for the 
Advancement of Science, San Francisco, Ca. 64-72. 

Conomos, T.J., 1979: Properties and circulation of San Fran¬ 
cisco Bay waters, in T.J. Conomos (ed.), San Francisco Bay: 
The Urbanized Estuary . Pacific Division, American Associa¬ 
tion for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco, Ca. 
38-50. 

Walters, R.A., R.T. Cheng, and T.J. Conomos, 1985: Time scales 
of circulation and mixing processes of San Francisco Bay 
waters. Hvdrobioloaia 129:13-36. 


31 



























































INTERANNUAL VARIABILITY IN DISSOLVED INORGANIC NUTRIENTS 

IN NORTHERN SAN FRANCISCO BAY ESTUARY 


David H. Peterson, Richard E. Smith, Stephen W. Hagar, 
Dana D. Harmon, Raynol E. Herndon, and Laurence E. Schemel 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Abstract 


Nearly two decades of seasonal dissolved inorganic nutrient- 
salinity distributions in northern San Francisco Bay estuary 
(1940-1980) illustrate interannual variations in effects of 
river flow (a nutrient source) and phytoplankton productivity (a 
nutrient sink). During winter, nutrient sources dominate the 
nutrient-salinity distribution patterns (nutrients are at or 
exceed conservative mixing concentrations). During summer, 
however, the sources and sinks are in close competition. In 
summer of wet years, the effects of increased river flow often 
dominate the nutrient distributions (nutrients are at or exceed 
conservative mixing concentrations), whereas in summers of dry 
years, phytoplankton productivity dominates (the very dry years 
1976-1977 were an exception for reasons not yet clearly known). 
Such source/sink effects also vary with chemical species. 

During summer, the control of phytoplankton on nutrient distri¬ 
butions is apparently strongest for ammonium, less so for 
nitrate and silica, and is the least for phosphate. Further¬ 
more, the strength of the silica sink (diatom productivity) is 
at a maximum at intermediate river flows. This relation, which 
is in agreement with other studies based on phytoplankton 
abundance and enumeration, is significant to the extent that 
diatoms are an important food source for herbivores. 

The balance or lack of balance between nutrient sources and 
sinks varies from one estuary to another just as it can from one 
year to another within the same estuary. At one extreme, in 
some estuaries river flow dominates the estuarine dissolved 
inorganic nutrient distributions throughout most of the year. 

At the other extreme, phytoplankton productivity dominates. In 
northern San Francisco Bay, for example, the phytoplankton 
nutrient sink is not as strong as in less turbid estuaries. In 
this estuary, however, river effects, which produce or are as¬ 
sociated with near-conservative nutrient distributions, are 
strong even at flows less than mean annual flow. Thus northern 
San Francisco Bay appears to be an estuary between the two ex¬ 
tremes and is shifted closer to one extreme or the other, depend¬ 
ing on interannual variations in river flow. 

Abstract from: 

Cloern, J.E. and F.H. Nichols (eds.), 1985: Temporal Dynamics 

of an Estuary: San Francisco Bay . D.W. Junk Publishers, 

Dordrecht, the Netherlands. 


33 















































































THE IMPACT OF WATER DIVERSIONS 
ON THE RIVER-DELTA-ESTUARY-SEA ECOSYSTEMS 

OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY AND THE SEA OF AZOV 

Michael A. Rozengurt, Michael J. Herz, 
and Michael Josselyn 

Paul F. Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies, 
San Francisco State University 


Abstract 


A review of the long-term impact of river diversions on the 
hydrological and biological features of the estuarine ecosystems 
of San Francisco Bay and the Sea of Azov (once Russia's richest 
fishing ground) indicates that despite differences in scale and 
in climatic, hydrographic, and physiographic regimes, the eco¬ 
logical status of these systems, involving the River-Delta- 
Estuary and adjacent coastal zone, depends on cumulative river 
runoff fluctuations. In the past, before human intervention, 
these systems were naturally maintained by stochastic processes, 
but as a result of regulation of river flow during the last 
30-40 years, these conditions have become primarily determinis¬ 
tic, artificially manipulated by man. Analysis of the relation¬ 
ships between water supply variables and parameters such as 
salinity and catch of anadromous fish in both San Francisco Bay 
and the Sea of Azov indicates that steady reduction of annual 
and spring freshwater supply by diversions exceeding 30 percent 
of the natural limits of the dominant fluctuations of these 
estuarine ecosystems has resulted in drastic declines in the 
fisheries. 

Unprecedented changes in ecological conditions have 
appeared 5-7 years after a period of 10-15 years of relatively 
stabilized seasonal stream flows. These flows were at 30-65 
percent of the mean historical water supply. The residual 
inflow onto the estuary cannot entrain enough water to flush 
wastes and excess salt into the sea and cannot provide the 
optimal ranges of nutrients, salinity, and other dissolved 
constituents necessary for the survival of estuarine species. 

In the Sea of Azov, flow reductions have resulted in 
increased salt intrusion from the Black Sea and have led to a 
massive invasion of scvphozoan medusae , resulting in radical 
declines in the economic and recreational significance of the 
Sea since the late 1970s. 


35 








Introduction 


Adaptation of estuarine organisms to a wide range of annual 
and seasonal fluctuations in biochemical and biological charac¬ 
teristics is the result of centuries of evolution, in response 
to the probabilistic nature of runoff variation. This process 
has resulted in the ability to populations of estuarine orga¬ 
nisms to recover from extreme hydrological conditions, e.g., 
drought-produced, catastrophic declines in runoff leading to 
salt intrusion, sporadic algal blooms, anoxia, etc. (Hedgpeth, 

1970; L'vovich, 1974; Bronfman, 1977; Mann, 1982; and Rozengurt, 
1974, 1983b). It is evident that the maintenance of estuarine 
characteristics such as biological productivity and flushing 
capacity are determined by the natural cycles of fluctuations of 
freshwater supply to the system (Baydin, 1980). This inflow is 
a renewable but limited resource. 

Geophysical and climatological properties of the watershed 
determine its volume and are important physical limitations that 
should be considered an essential component of overall estuarine 
resource management. Natural flow is a most essential factor to 
be considered in analyzing any system (Champ et al. 1981; 

Cronin, 1967; Lauff, 1967; Officer, 1976; and Vorovich et al.) 
to determine what guantity of water can be diverted without 
seriously damaging the estuary. However, the definition of 
"natural flow" has been confused with a more limited concept of 
"historic flow" based on the residual regulated flow, i.e., what 
is left after upstream and within Delta diversions. From this 
perspective "historic flow" is the unregulated runoff that 
occurred during some past period, according to hydrological 
definitions established by UNESCO (1974), and Sokolov and 
Chapman (1974). Both recommend performing basin analyses on 
unimpaired flow fluctuations over periods of at least 50-60 
years. 

To avoid confusion, it would be best to use the term 
"historic" or "natural" when the figure concerned is the 
unimpaired flow for all recorded years, and state the period 
during which these baseline observations were made. Residual 
flow should be considered as the net "regulated" rather than 
"historic" flow. 


Background 

In estuaries which have a mean inflow significantly higher 
than their total volume, the prevailing fluctuations of mean 
freshwater supply (5 year running means of natural annual or 
spring runoff under natural conditions) vary within 25 percent 
of normal 50-60 year averages. Hence, if diversion within a 
cycle, especially during periods of less than average flow, does 
not exceed the natural deviations from the average flow, the 
cumulative supply of the watershed may compensate for these 


36 




water withdrawals. In such a case, the estuarine ecosystem 
would survive regulated water supply fluctuations because they 
are within range of natural conditions. If diversions exceed 
these natural limits for prolonged periods, there will be little 
prospect of recovery because the natural resilience of the 
system will be reduced and deteriorating conditions will produce 
serious damage to its resources (Aleem, 1972; Rozengurt and 
Haydock, 1981; and Rozengurt and Herz, 1981). In many parts of 
the world, massive water diversions from estuaries have greatly 
reduced or eliminated major fisheries, with annual losses 
amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars, as a result of 
destruction of habitats and degradation of conditions necessary 
for reproduction and maturation (Aleem, 1972; White, 1977; Cross 
and Williams, 1981). 

In 1980, these problems were examined by the National 
Symposium on Freshwater Inflow to Estuaries in San Antonio, 
Texas. The Summary and Recommendations of this Symposium 
included the following: 

Published results regarding water development in rivers 
entering the Azov, Caspian, Black and Mediterranean Seas in 
Europe and Asia all point to the conclusion that no more 
than 2 5-3 0 percent of the historical river flow can be 
diverted without disasterous ecological consequences to the 
receiving estuary. Comparable studies on six estuaries by 
the Texas Water Resources Department showed that a 32 per¬ 
cent depletion of natural freshwater inflow to estuaries 
was the average maximum percentage that could be permitted 
if subsistence levels of nutrient transport, habitat main¬ 
tenance, and salinity control were to be maintained. 

(Clark and Benson, 1981, page 524). 

In the San Francisco Delta-Bay system where annual fresh¬ 
water flows have been reduced by as much as 62 percent (Nichols 
et al. 1986), fish populations have declined radically. The 
striped bass population is down to 2 0 percent and egg production 
is at 10 percent of levels of the 1960s (Striped Bass Working 
Group, 1982) and Chinook salmon population has declined to 30 
percent of 1960 levels (Kjelson et al., 1982). Many other 
investigators have attempted to quantify the relationship 
between river flow and fish abundance with varying degrees of 
success (Chadwick, 1971; Stevens, 1977; Smith and Kato, 1979). 

Materials and Methods 


In order to establish ecological criteria and make recommen¬ 
dations for management and protection of the San Francisco Bay 
estuarine system, two crucial questions must be answered: 


37 



1. How much can be diverted from the watershed before 
permanent damage is done to the ecosystem? 

2. How much water must be released into the system in 
order to mitigate the negative impact of water quality 
after diversions have produced such damage, and is it 
possible to maintain optimal levels of resources in the 
estuarine system? 

The Sea of Azov provides a comparative example of the 
impact of water withdrawals on the physical and biological 
characteristics of an estuary. In the large body of literature 
produced in the Soviet Union since the 1920s, the Sea of Azov is 
cited as the most productive low salinity region in the world. 
According to Zenkevich (1963, p. 465) the total fish catch was 
80 kg/hectare in some years. The case history of the Sea of 
Azov is strong evidence in support of the concept that fresh¬ 
water inflow from its two main rivers, the Don and Kuban, plays 
a major role in maintaining the biological productivity of the 
Sea and its estuarine systems (GOIN, 1972; Bronfman, 1971; 
Volovic, 1986). 

The purpose of this research is to: (1) examine the 
changes in the San Francisco Bay and the Sea of Azov ecosystems 
(Table 1 and Figure 1) associated with freshwater diversion 
patterns between 1921-1978; (2) analyze the relationship between 
the modification of annual and seasonal river inflow, the water 
quality of the ecosystem, and the status of its living and 
non-living resources; and (3) attempt to define the levels of 
river flow needed to meet the freshwater needs of these 
resources while also satisfying the requirements of California's 
agricultural, industrial, and municipal users. 

The following data have been used in our analyses: 

1. Monthly and annual natural and regulated river inflow 
to the Delta, and the corresponding Delta outflow to 
the Bay, for the period 1921-1978 (California 
Department of Water Resources 1980; Kelley and Tippets, 
1977). 

2. Commercial and sport catches of anadromous fish 
(striped bass [Mprqne saxatilis], and shad [Alosa 
sapidissima l. from 1884 to 1982 (Skinner, 1962; 

California Department of Fish and Game, 1983). 

3. Monthly and annual values of combined natural and 
regulated river inflow to the Sea of Azov, salinity of 
sea water, and commercial catch records (1930-1980) of 
major species of anadromous fish (publications of the 
Ministry of Fisheries of the U.S.S.R., All Union Insti¬ 
tute of Fisheries and Oceanography, and the Azov-Black 
Sea Institute of Fishery and other sources). 


38 






MORPHOMETRIC AND HYDROLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS 
OF THE RIVER-DELTA-ESTUARY-SEA ECOSYSTEM 









as 



03 


r—■> 







x: 



CJ 


+-> 

+-> 






+-> 



• r— 


CL 

e 


c— 







cn 


3 

cu 

O O 

O 


o 


4- 



O 


-- 

CO 

• • 

• 

C^- 

• 


O 



r— 



CU 

CD r-H 

rH 

CO 

t -1 





o 


o» 

E 

1-1 


CM 



CU 



CU 


or 

Q_ 






O 



CO 


03 







E 





e 







03 



• 


cu 







r— 



OO 


> 







03 



• 



r— 






CO 






03 











> 

o 






+-> 





4-> 

•r— 




c^- 


r— 



X-—^ 


•r— 

E 

lo co 

CO 


CM 


03 



00 


E 

o 

• • 

• 

c- 

• 


OO 





•r— 

4-> 

OO o 

o 

o 

O 





03 


r— 

00 



CM 



~a 



r—1 


o3 

•r— 






E 



1 


co 

x 






03 



CM 












CM 









E 



03 









cu 



rH 




o o 

o 

o 

o 


4-> 



■- 




• • 

• 

• 

• 


03 






+J 

CO o 

LO 

CO 

CM 


3 



LO 



c cu 

«—H I—1 

1-1 

CO 

*— H 





CU 



cu cr 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 


-a 



CJ 



CO E 

O rH 

LO 

LO 

LO 


cu 



E 


+-> 

cu 

. . 

• 

• 

• 


+-> 



3 


CL 

E OC 

cm 





o 



O 


Cl 

Cl 

I—H 





cu 



LO 









•r-> 



CU 









o 



oc 


>3 







e 





-*-> 







CL 



E 


•p - 

ITS 

CO o 

o 

o 

CO 





CU 


e 

O 

• . 

• 

. 

• 


TJ 



+-> 


•r— 

• r— 

.—i CO 

CO 

o 

T 1 


E 



03 


i — 

e cu 

r-H• 1 

1 

CO 

1 


03 



zs. 


ra 

O CT 

1 LO 

LO 

1 

r-H 







oo 

4-> C 

LO O 

o 

r—1 

o 


+-> 



-a 



CO fO 

• • 

• 

• 

• 


E 



E 



•r- OC 

00 





cu 



03 



x 






LO 












<U 



r —h 









E 



rH 



CO 






Cl 



CO 



4- 









1 



4- 






rr 



CO 


e 

co O 






- - n 



CM 


<u 

r— E 






CM 



03 


+-> 

03 3 









i — 1 


03 

2 S- 






03 



- — - 


3 

03 

O LO 

cn 

o 

o 


rH 






e u 

LO CO 

r-- 

LO 

LO 


•- 



LO 


r— 

T3 -r- 











03 

-E E 






>, 



E 


3 

+-> O 







. 


O 


e 

•r- +-> 






L0 

L0 


3 


C 3 CO 






>! 

CU 




<C 

•r— 






03 

o 


CJ 



x 







E 

• 

•r— 










3 

03 

r— 









-a 

o 

+J 

JD 









E 

LO 

03 

3 


03 







03 


X3 

CL 


CJ 

4- 







E 




*r— 

4-co 


co 


r^. 


E 

cu 

CJ 

4- 


E 

no 

Km 

• 

. 

• 

• 


03 

-E 

•r— 

O 


o 

CO 03 

CO 

CO 

CO 


E 

+-> 

E 



4-> 


C\J 

1-1 

CO 

CO 


-a 

O 

O 

LO 


to 

ac 






i— 


H-> 

+-> 


• r— 







o 

“O 

LO 

E 


x 







o 

E 

■ r— 

<U 










03 

x: 

E 









E 



+-> 









• r— 

-—- 

cu 

E 










JO 

+-> 

03 



<u 




r-^ 


-a 

A 

cu 

3. 



30 



CO 

LO 


cu 

03 

r— 

(U 



3 E 



• 

• 


-t—> 


3 

Q 





00 

r-H 


E 

CO 

E 




O 

CM C~ 

c^* 




as 

03 

O 

03 



> 

CO 





LO 

i H 

o 

•i— 









cu 

-_r 

E 

E 









E 


• r— 

E 









3 

03 


O 




o o 

o 

o 

03 



> 

E 

4- 




o o- 

o 

<^r 

LO 


03 

O 

O 

•r— 



0*M 

O LO 

co 

*—i 

i—i 


H-> 

LO 


r— 

• 


cu E 

E iZ 



0 * 



03 

• r— 

T3 

03 

03 


CO 





-a 


CU 

CJ 

H—> 


c 

co 






CU 

LO 


03 





CM 



— 

a; 

03 

‘— 

-a 



03 


>> 



o 


-3 

O 




H-> 


03 

E 


E 

• — 


E 

r-~ 



r— 

x— - -—- 

CO 

03 03 

<r - - 

4- 

--' 

LO 

4- 

CO 



<U O O 


OO -*-> 

CO 


CM 

<u 





CO CO 03 00 

o 

| i — 

r-'- 

-a 

r^- 

H-> 

T3 

i 




03 -t-> 03 

cj 

o cu 

03 

cu 

03 

03 

<U 

03 



e 

rH r— r—1 

1 /) 

E> Q 

r-H 

H—> 

f H 


H-J 

co 



(U 

i cu i 

■ f — 

E 

1 

03 

--- 

•i— 

03 

03 



1—1 > 

CM Q CM 

CJ 

<U E 

r—H 

i— 


H—> 

i— 

r—H 



03 -r- 

r—4 r— H 


— *r— 

CM 

3 

• 

LO 

3 

^" 



<u cu 

03 E 03 

03 

03 3 

03 

CJ 

CU 

LlI 

<J 




oo 

r—4 ro *—i 

E 

E CT *—* 

r— 

• 


r— 

>> 


e 

C 

-• _Q—' 

U_ 

CJ 03 

'-- 

03 

oo 

II 

03 

<U 



> o 

3 


03 O 


O 



CJ 

> 


CO 

O Q 


E 

CO X) 


r-H 

oo 

C-- 

CM 

E 


03 

M 


03 




• 



3 


CO 

<C 


OO 




ZD 



CO 


39 









Figure 1. Geographical maps of the Sea of Azov and its 
basin watershed in the southern USSR and of the 
San Francisco Bay/Delta watershed in the western United 
States (common scale used for both maps). 


40 


















Results 


The trend in fluctuations in natural runoff reflects 
climatic cycles and their variations over large regions and is 
not radically modified by man's activities (Figure 2). Analysis 
of natural runoff cycles (11-15 years as described by L'vovich, 
1979) in both the San Francisco Bay and Sea of Azov drainage 
basins indicates the two are almost in phase, and therefore 
suggests that any changes detected in regulated runoff are the 
result of human modification rather than climatological factors. 

An unusual feature of these variations is that the deviations of 
mean runoff in each cycle vary within 25 percent of the average 
perennial volume regardless of the magnitude of the annual mean 
or seasonal discharges into either drainage basin. 

Since the late 1950s, water withdrawals from the San 
Francisco Bay watershed have increased from 20-30 percent of the 
natural annual runoff to as much as 63 percent in 1977 (Figure 
3A), and for the spring months of April, May, and June, they 
have grown from 30-35 percent to 60-85 percent. For the Sea of 
Azov, diversions have grown to as high as 46 percent (1974; 

Figure 3B). This radical reduction of runoff superimposed on 
natural cycles has diminished the water supply of the Delta and 
Bay to levels below those observed for natural fluctuations for 
annual or spring runoffs. 

The deviations (for running averages of any 5-year period) 
of regulated water supply to the Delta and Bay from "normal" 
runoff have predominant ranges of -35 percent to -60 percent 
(annual), and -40 percent to -85 percent for spring 
(April-June). Deviation for both natural, annual, and spring 
5-year running means of Delta outflow, on the other hand, 
generally vary around 15-25 percent of the mean (Figure 4 A-D). 
This indicates that such extreme negative deviations did not 
occur in the natural state of this estuarine system and have 
only been seen since the onset of major human regulation. 

Between 1955 and 1978, the period after the completion of 
the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP), 
major water storage and transport facilities, diversions 
amounted to a total of 296 km 3 of freshwater (240 MAF; Figure 
5B), equivalent to 40 times the volume of the San Francisco 
Bay. Of this, 202 km 3 , or 164 million acre-feet (MAF), was 
diverted from the rivers for irrigation and domestic water 
supply and 94 km 3 (76 MAF) was removed from Delta outflow for 
agricultural and other needs. In other words, for 2 3 years, an 
average of 8.8 km 3 (7.1 MAF)/year was withdrawn from river 
inflow to the Delta and 4.0 km 3 (3.3 MAF) was removed from 
Delta outflow to the Bay, yielding a total of 12.8 km 3 (10.4 
MAF) per year that never reached San Francisco Bay. For the 
same period, (Figure 5A) the total losses of freshwater supply 
to the Sea of Azov accounted for almost 250 km 3 , or about 11 
km 3 /year. 


41 





and (2) combined regulated river inflow to the Sea of Azov (dashed line 
represents the average natural river inflow to the Sea of Azov, 1916- 
1980). 


44 



— 1 -*-1-=-■-1-._ L- i 1 -l.i 

1M ° 1*40 1454 1*40 1*70 TMO 

Year 


Fig 2B. Fluctuations in the 5-year running average of (2) natural 
inflow to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and (3) regulated Delta 
outflow to San Francisco Bay (dashed line represents the natural river 
inflow to the Delta, 1 921-1978). 


42 












Y«ar 


Fig. 3A. Fresh water diversions from the Sacramento-San Joaquin river 
system expressed as the percentage of the annual natural river inflow to 
San Francisco Bay. 



Tl" 1 !! 

1920 


TT 

1930 


i n 11 1 i n 11 " 11 ■ ■ - n • 

1940 v 1950 1960 


TT 

W70 


Fig. 3B. Fresh water diversions from the Don-Kuban river system 
expressed as the percentage of the annual natural river inflow to the Sea 
of Azov. 


43 















40 



Y • • r • 


Fig. 4A. Annual percentage devia¬ 
tion of natural (1) and regulated 
(2) Delta outflow from mean natural 
Delta outflow (1921-1978 computed 
with 5-year running means (annual 
mean natural Delta outflow, 1921— 
1978 = 27.7 million acre feet). 



the month of May of natural (1) and 
regulated (2) Delta outlfow from 
mean natural Delta outlfow for May 
(1921-1978), computed with 5-year 
running means (May mean natural 
Delta outflow, 1 921 -1 978 = 4.1 5 

million acre feet). 



*21 25 *31 35 *41 45 *61 55 *61 55 *7175 


Y • a r • 

Fig. 4B. Percentage deviation for 
the month of April of natural (1 ) 
and regulated (2) Delta outflow for 
April (1921-1978), computed with 5- 
year running means (April mean 
natural Delta outflow, 1921 -1 978 = 
4.10 million acre feet). 



Fig. 4D. Percentage deviation for 
the month of June of natural (1) 
and regulated (2) Delta outlfow 
from mean natural Delta outflow for 
June (1 921-1978), computed with 5- 
year running means (June mean 
natural Delta outflow, 1921 -1 978 = 
2.51 million acre feet). 


44 



















Salinity Increase* x 10 b tonne* Lo**e» 


300_ 



400 


300 


CO 

2 


200 


100 


0 


300 


250 


200 

u: 

< 

« 

o 

K 

150 


100 


50 


Fig. 5 A. Cumulative curves: (1 ) freshwater 

losses and (2) accumulation of salinity in the Sea 
of Azov. 


\ 


45 


Volume ot Fresh Water 









Fig. 5B. Cumulative quantity of freshwater 
diverted (and so lost to the Delta/Bay system) 
from withdrawals (l) within the Delta, (2) 
upstream of the Delta and (3) combined. 

46 


K M 









This pronounced trend of declining water supply had a 
number of negative impacts on physical properties and biological 
productivity of both the Sea of Azov and the San Francisco Bay 
estuarine systems: 

1. An increase in the frequency of salt intrusion into the 
upper part of the Delta and Bay (Cloern and Nichols, 
1985a; Nichols et. al. 1986) and, in the case of the 

Sea of Azov, into the Don and Kuban River estuarine 
systems (Bronfman, 1977; Remisova, 1984a, b). 

2. An increase of mean salinity in San Francisco Bay from 
approximately 20 ppt (under outflow conditions of 34.2 
kin 3 or 27.7 MAF; Rozengurt, 1983b) to 27 ppt (15-17 
km 3 or 12.2-13.8 MAF) and, for the same period for 
the Sea of Azov, from 9 ppt (43.0 km 3 ) to 16 ppt 
(21-25 km 3 ). These changes represent mean increases 
of 0.3 ppt and 0.4 ppt per hyrological year, respective¬ 
ly, for the two water bodies. 

3. Significant reduction in the size and biological 
productivity of the "entrapment" (null) zones have 
occurred in the Delta and San Francisco Bay during the 
summer months. Compression of these nursery zones, 
their upstream movement, and the resulting changes in 
their biochemical and biological properties have been 
implicated as factors responsible for low survival 
rates of eggs, larvae, and fry and for significant 
population decreases (California Department of Fish and 
Game, 1976; Herrgesell et. al. 1983; Cloern and 
Nichols, 1985b). 

4. Reduction of sediment load discharge to the Delta-Bay 
Coastal Zone ecosystem (60-75 percent of the 8xl0 6 
tonnes discharged per year for mean natural runoff 
conditions; Krone, 1979). This leads us to speculate 
that the absence of sediment may be partially responsi¬ 
ble for levee failures in the Delta as well as for in¬ 
creased beach erosion in the near coastal zone, since 
both depend on deposition of sediment (each receives at 
least 30 percent of the Delta and Bay's sediment load; 
Kockelman et. al. 1982). 

5. In the Sea of Azov, there has been a 60 percent 
reduction in primary and secondary productivity and 
over 95 percent reduction in catches of anadromous fish 
(Goldman and Maysky, 1972; Makarov, et. al. 1982; 
Remisova, 1984a, b: Figure 6A) resulting from 
diversions of more than 60 percent of historic spring 
(and more than 45 percent of annual) flows. Russian 
scientists have determined that the reduction of runoff 
of about 1 km 3 reduces the Sea of Azov anadromous 


47 


fish stocks by about 3,000 tonnes (Marti and Musatov, 
1973; Bronfman, 1977). 

These flow modifications have also led to a 40-60 
percent reduction in nutrient supply, decreases of 
60-70 percent of sediment load and 80 percent reduction 
in spawning and nursery areas, with salt intrusion 
compressing the null zone into the pre-Delta and Delta 
areas and salinity increasing from 0.5 to 10 ppt 
(Baydin, 1980; Makarov, et al., 1982; Remisova, 

1984a,b; Volovic, 1986). Numerous attempts to stop the 
destruction of the Sea of Azov have failed. The 
institution of extensive fishery regulations and the 
release of more than 5.5 billion hatchery-reared fry in 
1976 and hundreds of millions of fry of anadromous and 
semi-anadromous fish between 1956-76 did not mitigate 
the detrimental effect of excessive water diversions on 
living resources of the ecosystem. 

Further, when the mean salinity of the Azov seawater 
stabilized at 14-16 ppt in the late 1970s (compared to 
9.5 ppt in the 1930s), there was an invasion of marine 
species. The billions of medusae (Figure 6B) that 
moved into the Sea of Azov (Makarov, et al., 1982) and 
into its formerly less brackish Taganrog Harbor and Don 
River Delta (Figure 1) from the Black Sea presented a 
serious threat to the survival of many indigenous 
species. These jellyfish have created severe problems 
in the Sea of Azov such as food competition between 
them and fish, and public health problems along 
hundreds of kilometers of beaches created by accumu¬ 
lation of dead medusae. 

6. Although the San Francisco Bay estuarine system has not 
yet deteriorated to the level of the Sea of Azov, the 
impact of freshwater diversion on the survival of 
living estuarine resources in both systems has many 
alarming similarities: accumulation of organic and 
inorganic compounds from agricultural drainage; 
saltwater intrusion along the deep channels into the 
Bay and Delta (Orlob, 1977); gradual salt buildup 
throughout the estuary; and spontaneous algal blooms 
(Cloern and Nichols, 1985a; Nichols et al., 1986). In 
addition, the alteration of the Delta into a sophisti¬ 
cated plumbing system has led to disruption of fish 
migration routes and their spawning and nursery areas 
(Moyle, 1976; California Department of Fish and Game, 
1976, 1983; Striped Bass Working Group, 1982; 

Herrgesell, et al., 1983) and a significant reduction 
of flushing intensity and circulation in all parts of 
the Bay (Rozengurt, 1983a; Cloern and Nichols, 1985a). 

All of these factors have contributed to diminishing 


48 


.,8000 



'll.II.II.II. II.II.II 

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 


Y*«r 

Fig. 6A. Fluctuations in the 5-year running average of (1) regulated 
combined river inflow to the Sea of Azov and commercial catch of 
anadromous fish (2) Russian sturgeon ( Acipenser guldenstadti ), Beluga 
(Huso huso L.) and sevruga ( Acipenser stellatus Palas), (3) Kerch (Black 
Sea) shad ( Alosa kessleri pontica ). 



°a 


CO 

o 


6.2 

E 

4c 
jc 
& 


X 


U) 

12 £ 

c 




4 

0 


Fig. 6B -population explosion of the marine jellyfish ( Aurelia ) inside 
the formerly brackish Sea of Azov as a result of increased freshwater 
diversions and the resulting rise in salinity concentrations. (1) Annual 
average salinity, (2) combined average annual freshwater diversions 
expressed as a percentage of the natural runoff to the Sea of Azov, (5) 
raw weight of jellyfish (Aurelia aurita and Rhizostom a) in millions of 
tonnes, (6) combined number of jellyfish in billions. 

49 


Tonnes 



























catches of anadromous fish in the Bay and the adjacent 
coastal zone, and threaten the sport landing of fish 
and shellfish in the Bay as a whole. 

7. Correlations of records of commercial catches of 
salmon, striped bass, and shad with spring runoff to 
the San Francisco Bay (2-4 year means) for pre-project 
years (1915-1940) indicate that there were significant 
landings only when spring Delta outflows were 3.7-6.2 
km 3 (3-5 MAF) for the preceeding 2-4 years. High 
correlations between mean annual Delta outflow and 
landings of striped bass, salmon, and shad strongly 
support the hypothesis that at least 23.4 km 3 (19.0 
MAF) or 70 percent of the long-term average must reach 
the Bay during the 3-5 years prior to the year of catch 
to ensure successful commercial landings. The use of 
lag times or averages of water flow over several years 
to predict fishery abundance has been documented in 
other estuarine systems (Therriault and Levasseur 1986; 
Sutcliffe et al., 1977). It is important to use 
averages which correspond to the reproductive maturity 
of the fish. Figure 7 A-D shows some of these 
correlations. In contrast, the current range of mean 
annual and spring water supply to the Bay for the same 
time lag is 1.5-2.5 and 2-5 times less than the long¬ 
term average, respectively. The relative value of 
negative deviations of 5-year running mean freshwater 
supply to the Bay has dropped 60-85 percent below 
"normal" spring, and 45-60 percent below "normal" 
annual Delta outflow for the period 1921-1980. 

In recent years, commercial fishing has been prohibited 
in San Francisco Bay and Delta waters (since the late 
1950s for salmon and shad, and since 1935 for striped 
bass). Nevertheless, sport catches of these species 
have declined to as little as 3 0 percent of levels of 
20 years ago despite a great increase in sportfishing 
effort, improved treatment of sewage discharges, and 
massive hatchery releases. 

8. Figure 8A illustrates the steady decline of 3-year 
running means of regulated spring Delta outflow since 
1954. The deviations (negative) of water supply to the 
Bay from mean natural Delta outflow were nearly 80 
percent for most of the springs of the 1970s (Figure 
8B). This demonstrates that the estuarine system was 
deprived of significant amounts of freshwater and 
implies that the high levels of diversion are responsi¬ 
ble for the drastic decline in striped bass catches 
(Figure 8C) and the Striped Bass Index (Figure 8D). 

Note the relationship between flow (Figure 8A), and 
catch (Figure 8C) with 3-year lag, e.g., 1954-56 


50 


■1 7.29 + 6.47 lnX 
0. 80 


•w» 


•mo 


• 1017 


• 101 * 


• mi 
• mi 

• 1022 


'•a ^ 

• • 1020 


3000 


2000 


10 20 % 30 40 

l 10 A.F. 

Fig. 7A. The relationship between annual salmon catch in the Sacramento- 
San Joaquin rivers and upper San Francisco Bay and the mean regulated 
Delta outflow to San Francisco Bay for five running years. Each salmon 
catch is the amount caught in the last year of five previous running 
years of outflow (e.g. salmon catch for 1918 is based on outflow for 
1914-1 91 9) . 



3000 


2000 


1000 


0 


-1_,_I_._l_ 

2.0 4.0 6.0 

KM 

Fig. 7B. Ibe relationship between annual commercial salmon catch in the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin rivers and upper San Francisco Bay and the mean 
Delta regulated outflow for a period of three running months (April-May- 
June). Each year's salmon catch is based on a lag outflow period of two 
years after the last spring Delta outflow to the Bay and for two years 
previous (e.g. salmon catch for 1916 is based on Apri1-May-June outflow 
for 1912-1 91 4). 


51 










---1 . _ 1 . . i--- 

20 , M 40 

KM 

Fig. 7C. The relationship between annual shad catch in the San Francisco 
Bay area and the mean regulated Delta outlflow to San Francisco Bay for 
two running years. Each annual catch is based on a lag outflow period of 
one year after the last of two years of previous Delta outflow (e.g. shad 
catch for 1916 is based on outlfow for 1914-1915). 



2-0 40 6 0 

KM 

Fig. 7D. The relationship between annual striped bass catch in the San 
Francisco area and the mean Delta regulated outflow to San Francisco Bay 
for a period of three running months (April-May-June). Each annual 
striped bass catch is based on a lag outflow period of two years after 
the last spring Delta outflow bo the Bay and for two years previous (e.g. 
striped bass catch for 1917 is based on Apr il-May-June outflow for 1913- 
1915). 


52 


Ton* 










3.59 x *) 6 A.F. (1921 -1978) 



q.40 




jl! 


ill 





1960 1965 1970 1975 

Ytiri 


1980 


1985 


Fig. g. (A) Fluctuations of Delta regulated water supply to San 
Francisco Bay during spring (April-June). Data represent 3-year running 
means (e.g., 1958-1 960). (B) Deviation in percentage of Delta regulated 

water supply to San Francisco Bay of mean spring natural runoff. (C-1) 
San Francisco Bay striped bass party boat catch/angler day (1 959-1 982). 
(C — 2) Total striped bass party boat catch/season in number of fish 
(1 959-1982). (D-1 ) Annual juvenile striped bass abundance index (1959- 

1985). (D-2) Five-year running means of striped bass abundance index 

(1 959/63-1 981/85). 


53 


















flow/1959 catch). Regressions between sportfishing 
catches of striped bass for this period and Delta 
outflow for the 3 years preceeding the year of catch 
with a 0-2 year time lag are similar to those between 
striped bass commercial catch and flow shown in Figure 
8 . 


9. In the literature on the status of Chinook salmon 
spawning populations in the Sacramento-San Joaquin 
watershed, four factors have been proposed to explain 
their precipitous population decline: dams, water 
diversions, pollutants, and the loss of habitat 
(California Department of Fish and Game, 1983). The 
early winter run is considered a major source of 
recruitment for this stock (Hallock and Fisher, 1985). 
Between 1967-1982, when reliable counts were made of 
winter salmon runs, the 5-year running means of regu¬ 
lated spring water supply to the estuary was about 
35-80 percent of spring perennial mean runoff (1921- 
1978). The average annual volume of water diversion 
was approximately 12.2 km 3 (11.0 MAF; Figure 9) and 
cumulative withdrawals from the Sacramento-San Joaquin 
river water supply to the estuarine system reached 
about 190 km 3 (158 MAF; Figure 9A) between 1967 and 
1982. During the same period the number of winter-run 
Chinnok salmon returning to spawn in the upper part of 
the Sacramento River was reduced as much as 60 times 
(Figure 9D, Hallock and Fisher, 1985) despite attempts 
to mitigate this decline with release of millions of 
hatchery-reared juveniles (Figure 9C, California 
Department of Fish and Game, 1983). 

While all of the factors mentioned above may contribute to 
reduction of the salmon population in this watershed, our data 
strongly suggest that overall reduction of runoff and cumulative 
losses of water and biochemical constituents resulting from 
diversions will continue to be the principal factors governing 
migration, spawning success, and recruitment in this stock. 
Kjelson et al. (1982) also attribute decreases in salmon 
populations to increases in water diversions. They found that 
the March-June runoff of up to a total of 8.6 km 3 (7 MAF), 
lagged 2.5 years, may provide optimal conditions for Chinook 
salmon spawners during nursery migration. Similar deterioration 
of ecological conditions and biological productivity following 
excessive freshwater withdrawals has occurred in estuaries in 
Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, and the United States. 

(Hedgpeth, 1970; Aleem, 1972; Baydin, 1980; Cross and Williams, 
1981; L'vovich, 1974; Meleshkin et al., 1973; Mancy, 1979; 
Rozengurt, 1971, 1974, 1983a, b; Rozengurt and Herz, 1981; Mann, 
1982; Tolmazin, 1985; and White, 1977). 


54 


A 



Fig. 9 . (A) Cumulative combined upstream diversions of the Sacramento- 

San Joaquin river systems (1 967/69-1977/78). First data point is sum of 
diversions from 1955-1967. (B) Annual gross upstream diversions of the 

Sacramento-San Joaquin river systems (1967-1978). (C) Annual release of 

yearling chinook salmon juveniles from California State hatcheries (1970- 
1981). (D) Five-year running mean of winter-run spawning salmon past 

the Red Bluff diversion dam (1967/71 -1 980/84). 


55 










Conclusions 


Since the late 1950s, diversions of water from the San 
Francisco Bay watershed have increased from 20-30 percent to as 
much as 63 percent annual runoff and from 30-35 percent to 60-85 
percent for spring runoff (April-June). During the same period, 
the predominant ranges of negative deviations from the "normal" 
runoff (1921-1978) for the 5-year running means of annual dis¬ 
charges (regulated) to the Delta and Bay is 35-60 percent, the 
range is 40-85 percent for the spring discharges. Without regu¬ 
lation, outflow deviations of natural water supply for both 
annual and spring 5-year running means of normal runoff varied 
only 15-25 percent from the same mean value. Overall, between 
1955 and 1978, (a period when the major water storage and 
diversion facilities were fully operational about 286 km 3 (240 
MAF), or as much as 40 times the volume of San Francisco Bay, 
was diverted from the system. 

These reductions of freshwater flow to the estuary have: 
greatly increased salt intrusion into Delta waters, threatening 
agricultural and municipal water intakes; produced massive 
reduction of nutrients and sediment load; and greatly reduced 
flushing and circulation activity formerly accomplished by heavy 
spring inflows. 

Concurrent with these flow-related changes, there have been 
massive reductions of fish populations. Salmon are down to 30 
percent of 1960s levels, while striped bass are down to 2 0 
percent of their levels of 20 years ago. Statistical analyses 
reflect an underlying relationship between catch of salmon, 
striped bass, and shad and freshwater flow to the estuary for 
the preceeding 2-4 years. 

High correlations obtained between commercial fish catches 
(prior to construction of California water projects) and running 
mean Delta outflow indicate that annual water supply had to be 
at least 23.0 km 3 (19.0 MAF) and spring runoff (April-June) in 
the range of 3.1-3.7 km 3 (2.5-3.0 MAF), 69 percent and 68-84 
percent of the historic unimpaired flow, respectively, for the 
2-4 preceding years to ensure optimal commercial catch. Similar 
analyses for successful sportfishing catches (post project 
construction) show that annual mean flows of 21.0 km 3 (17.0 
MAF) and spring Delta outflows of 2.5-3.1 km 3 (2.0-2.5 MAF) 
are needed for the 2-3 preceding years to ensure significant 
catches. However, during 1967-1982 (CVP and SWP operating at 
full capacity), the 3-5 year running mean spring and annual 
water supply into and out of the Delta was several times less 
than this. 

The result has been a major impact on recruitment and 
recreational catches of striped bass and salmon since the late 
1960s. Salmon and striped bass natural reproduction has been 
reduced 65 percent and 80 percent, respectively, over the past 


56 



20 years (California Department of Fish and Game 1983). The 
direct economic impact for the last two decades has been losses 
of about 1.3 billion dollars (Meyer Resources, 1985). 

In the Sea of Azov, diversions of more than 60 percent of 
historic spring (and more than 45 percent of annual) flows have 
resulted in: 

1. Distortion of circulation dynamics and reduction in 
vertical mixing (increases in vertical stability index) 
as much as 3-5 times resulting in significant increases 
in frequency of anoxic conditions in deep water near 
the bottom, covering as much as 60 percent of the sea 
area (Volovic, 1986). 

2. Accumulation of more than 1,500 x 10 6 tonnes of salt 
and an overall increase of the mean salinity from 9-9.5 
to 14-16.0 ppt and in the pre-Delta areas from 0.5-3.0 
to 6-10.0 ppt for the last two decades. 

3. Reduction of 60-75 percent (2 x 10 6 tonnes) in sedi¬ 
ment load, and 80 percent in spawning and nursery 
areas. 

The resulting economic losses for fisheries since the late 1960s 
have been tens of millions of dollars per year (Meleshkin et. 
al. 1973, 1981; Vorovich et. al. 1981). 

These and other similar historical examples of the relation 
between human needs for freshwater and protection of estuarine 
environments (Mann, 1982; Meleshkin, 1981; Rozengurt and 
Tolmazin, 1974; Rozengurt and Herz, 1981) indicate that special 
consideration should be given to the consequences of timing and 
volume of water withdrawals on recruitment and landings of 
anadromous fish, because of their sensitivity to cumulative 
fluctuations in freshwater supply. It may be possible to 
alleviate these problems and to protect freshwater intakes in 
the Delta if limits to water diversion can be agreed upon. 
Perhaps this can be done through the establishment of salinity 
and flow standards for San Francisco Bay (neither of which 
currently exists). In addition, Rozengurt (1983a) has suggested 
a restraining channel be constructed in part of the existing 
ship channel in San Pablo Strait (2 walls 1-3 kilometers long 
and 200 meters apart, extending from the bottom to just above 
the high tide level). Hydrological model testing of this design 
will be required to determine its effectiveness in limiting salt 
intrusion into Suisun Bay and the Delta (Rozengurt, 1971, 1974). 


57 


Acknowledgements 


This research was supported by grants from the San 
Francisco Foundation/Buck Trust. The authors gratefully 
acknowledge the critical comments and editorial and cartographic 
assistance of Professor Joel W. Hedgpeth and technical help by 
Douglas Spicher. 


References 


Aleem, A.A., 1972: Effect of river outflow management on marine 
life. Marine Biology . 15:200-208. 

Baydin, S.S., 1980: Redistribution of river runoff between sea 
basins and its role in the environmental complex of seas 
and river mouths. Soviet Hydrology: Selected Papers . 
19:86-93. (American Geophysical Union) 

Bronfman, A.M., 1977: The Azov Sea water economy and ecological 
problems; investigations and possible solutions. In G.F. 
White (ed.) Environmental Effects of Complex Estuaries . 
Boulder, CO. Westview Press, 39-58. 

California Department of Fish and Game, 1976: Report to the 

State Water Resources Control Board on the Impact of Water 

Development on Fish and Wildlife Resources in the Sacra - 

mento-San Joaguin Estuary . Sacramento, CFG Exhibit #3, 
November, 1976. 

California Department of Fish and Game (Anadromous Fisheries 

Branch), 1983: Salmon Management in California . Prepared 
for the Pacific Fisheries Management Council. 

California Department of Fish and Game (Division of Planning), 
1980: California Central Valley Natural Flow Data. 

Sacramento, CA, State of California Resources Agency. 

Chadwick, H.K., 1971: Striped bass and water development in the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary. In A Symposium on the 
Biological Significance of Estuaries. Vol. II . Washington, 
D.C., Sport Fishing Institute, 58-68. 

Champ, M.A.; Villa, 0; and Bubeck, R.C. (1981): Historical over¬ 
view of freshwater inflow and sewage treatment plant 
discharges to the Potomac River estuary with resultant 
nutrient and water quality trends. In: Proceedings of the 
National Symposium on Freshwater Inflows to Estuaries . 

Vol. II. San Antonio Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Dept, 
of Interior, 350-373. 


58 
















Clark, J. and Benson, N.G., 1981: Summary and recommendations 
of symposium. In R.D. Cross and D.L. Williams (eds.) 
Proceedings of the National Symposium on Freshwater Inflow 

to Estuaries. Vol. II . Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of 
Interior, 523-528. 

Cloern, J.E., and Nichols, F.H., 1985a: Time Scales and 

mechanisms of estuarine variability; synthesis from studies 
of San Francisco Bay. In J.E. Cloern and F.H. Nichols 
(Eds.) Temporal Dynamics of an Estuarv-San Francisco Bay . 
Dordrecht, Netherlands. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, 229-237. 

Cloern, J.E., and Nichols, F.H., (eds.), 1985b: Temporal Dy ¬ 

namics of an Estuarv-San Francisco Bay . Dordrecht, Nether¬ 
lands. Dr. W. Junk Publishers. 

Cronin, L.E., 1967: The role of man in estuarine processes. 

In: G.H. Lauff. (ed.), Estuaries . Washington, D.C., Ameri¬ 

can Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication 
No. 83, 667-689. 

Cross, R.D., and D.L. Williams (eds.), 1981: Proceedings of the 

National Symposium on Freshwater Inflow to Estuarine. Vols. 

I and II . Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-81704, 
Washington, D.C., U.S. Dept, of the Interior. 

GOIN, 1972: Present and projected water and salt balance of the 
southern seas of the U.A.S.R. Moscow, U.S.S.R. Transactions 
of the Government Oceanographic Institute . (GOIN), No. 108 
(In Russian). 

Goldman, E.J., and V.N. Maysky, 1972: Dynamics of commercial 

fish catch of the Sea of Azov and the causes of their fluc¬ 
tuation. In Investigations of the Fisheries of the Sea of 
Azov: Conference Proceedings. June 13-15, 1972 . Postov-on- 

Don, Ministry of Fisheries of the U.S.S.R. (In Russian). 

Hallock, R.J., and F.W. Fisher, 1985: Status of Winter-Run 

Chinook Salmon. Onchorhvnchus tshawvtscha, in the Sacra ¬ 

mento River . AFB Office Report. Sacramento, California 
Department of Fish and Game, Anadromous Fisheries Branch. 

Hedgpeth, J.W. 1970. Statement in The Nation's Estuaries: San 

Francisco Bay and Delta . Subcommittee on Government Opera¬ 
tions, House of Representatives, 91st Congress, 2nd Ses¬ 
sion, 361-386. 

Herrgesell, P.L.; R.G. Schaffter; and C.J. Larsen, 1983: 

Effects of Freshwater Outflow on San Francisco Bay Biolog ¬ 

ical Resources . Sacramento, CA, Department of Fish and 
Game, State of California Technical Report #7. 


59 






















Kelley, D.W.; and W.E. Tippets; 1977; Delta outflow and San 

Francisco Bay. A report prepared for the Delta Environ¬ 
mental Advisory Committee of the California DWR, 32pp. 

Kjelson, M.A.; Raquel, P.F.; and Fisher, F.W., 1982: Life 

history of fall-run juvenile Chinook Salmon, Onchorhynchus 
tshawvtscha . in the Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary, Cali¬ 
fornia. In V.S. Kennedy, (Ed.) Estuarine Comparisons , New 
York, Academic Press, 393-411. 

Kockelman, W.T.; T.J. Connors; and A.E. Leviton (eds.) 1982: 

San Francisco Bay: Use and Protection . San Francisco. 
Pacific Division of the AAAS. 

Krone, R.B., 1979: Sedimentation in the San Francisco Bay 

system. In T.J. Conomos, (ed.) San Francisco Bav: The 
Urbanized Estuary . San Francisco. Pacific Division of the 
AAAS. 

Lauff, G.H. (Ed.), 1967: Estuaries . Washington, D.C., American 

Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication No. 
83. 


L'vovich, M.T., 1974: World Water Resources and Their Future . 
Translation, 1979. American Geophysical Union. 

Makarov, E.H.; V.P. Zakutskij; and V.V. Guskov, 1982: The 

assessment of the stock of the Azov Sea-Black Medusae and 
recommendations for their utilization in the national 
economy. In Biological Productivity in the Azov and 
Caspian Seas . Ministry of Fisheries of the V.S.S.R., 

Moscow, VNIRO, 107-113. (In Russian). 

Mann, K.H., 1982: Ecology of Coastal Waters. A Systems 

Approach . Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. 

Mancy, K.H., 1979: The Aswan High Dam and Its Environmental 
Implications . Nairobi, Kenya. Socita Internationalis 
Limnologiae Workshop on Limnology of African Lakes. 
December, 1979. 

Marti, U.U., and Musatov,, A.D., 1973: Management of water 

regimes is responsible for the success of fisheries. In: 
The Problems of Regulation and Use of Water Resources . 

Moscow, Nauka (Science), p. 179-192. 

Meleshkin, M.T., 1981: Econologic Problems of the World Oceans . 
Moscow, Economics, 279pp. 

Meleshkin, M.T.; Rozengurt, M.A.; and Tolmazin, D.M., 1973. 

The problems and methods of improving efficiency of use of 
water resources of the Sea of Azov basin: economic and 
hydrological aspects. ODESSA Journ. The Problems of the 
Economy of Sea and the World Ocean . Ac. of Sci., UKSSR V. 

2. 3-15. 


60 





















Meyer Resources, 1985: The Economic Value of Striped Bass, 

Morone saxatilis, Chinook salmon. Oncorhvncus tshawvtscha, 
and Steelhead Trout. Salmo gairdneri. of the Sacramento and 

San Joaquin River Systems . Sacramento, CA. Dept, of Fish & 
Game, Anadromous Fisheries Branch, Administrative Report 
No. 85-3. 


Moyle, P.B., 1976: Inland Fishes of California . Berkeley, 
University of California Press. 

Nichols, F.H.; J.E. Cloern; S.N. Luoma; and D.H. Peterson, 1986: 
The modification of an estuary. Science . 231:567-573. 

Officer, C.B., 1976: Physical Oceanography of Estuaries (and 
Associated Coastal Waters .) New York, J. Wiley & Sons. 

Orlob, G.T., 1977: Impact of upstream storage and diversions on 
on salinity balance in estuaries. Estuarine Processes . V. 

2. Ac. Press, 3-17. 

Remisova, S.S., 1984a: Water balance of the Sea of Azov. 

Journal of Water Resources . 1:109-121. 

Rozengurt, M.A., 1971: Analysis of the impact of the Dniester 
River regulated runoff on the salt regime of the Dniester 
Estuary. Kiev, Scientific Thought . Ac. of Sci., USSR, 

132pp. Library of Congress GB2308.B55R69. 

Rozengurt, M.A., 1974: Hydrology and prospects of reconstruc¬ 
tion of natural resources of the north-western part of the 
Black Sea estuaries. Kiev. Scientific Thought . Ac. of 
Sci. USSR, 224pp. Library of Congress GB2308.B55R69. 

Rozengurt, M.A., 1983a: On environmental approach to protecting 
estuaries from salt intrusion. In O.T. Magoon and H. 
Converse (eds.) Coastal Zone ' 83 : Proceedings of the 
Third Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management, Vol. III .. 

New York. American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 
2279-2293. 

Rozengurt, M.A., 1983b: The Environmental Effect of Extensive 

Water Withdrawals on the River-Estuarv-Sea Ecosystem. Part 

II . Sacramento, CA, State of California Resources Agency, 
Department of Water Resources, 157 p. 

Rozengurt, M.A. and I. Haydock, 1981: Methods of computation 
and ecological regulation of the salinity regime in es¬ 
tuaries and shallow seas in connection with water regula¬ 
tion for human requirements. In R.D. Cross and D.L. 
Williams (eds.) Proceedings of the National Symposium on 
Freshwater Inflow to Estuaries. Vol. II . Washington, D.C., 
U.S. Dept, of the Interior, 474-506 pp. 


61 





















Rozengurt, M.A. and M.J. Herz, 1981: Water, water everywhere, 
but just so much to drink. Oceans . 14:65-67. 

Rozengurt, M.A. and Tolmazin, D.M., 1974: The conflict between 
energetics and nature. Kiev, Science and Society . No. 10, 
6-9. 

Skinner, J.E., 1962: An Historical Review of the Fish and 

Wldlife Resources of the San Francisco Bay Area . Sacra¬ 
mento, CA. Department of Fish and Game, Water Projects 
Branch, Report #1. 

Smith, S.E., and S. Kato, 1979: The fisheries of San Francisco 
Bay: Past, present, and future. In Conomos, T. (Ed.) San 

Francisco Bav: The Urbanized Estuary . San Francisco. 
Pacific Division of the AAAS 445-468pp. 

Sokolov, A.A., and T.G. Chapman (eds.) 1974: Methods for Water 
Balance Computations . Paris. UNESCO Press. 

Stevens, D.E., 1977: Striped Bass (Morone saxatilis) year class 
strength in relation to river flow in the Sacramento-San 
Joaquin estuary, California. Transactions of the American 
Fisheries Society . 106:34-42. 

Striped Bass Working Group, 1982: The Striped Bass Decline in 
the San Francisco Bav-Delta Estuary . Sacramento, CA. 
California State Water Resources Control Board. 

Tolmazin, D.M., 1985: Changing coastal oceanography of the 

Black Sea. In: M.U. Angel and R. Smith (eds.) Progress 
in Oceanography Volume 15 . New York, Pergamon Press, 

217-276pp. 

UNESCO, 1974: International Glossary of Hydrology . Geneva, 
UNESCO Press, p. 90. 

Volovic, S.P., 1986: The fundamental features of transformation 
of the Sea of Azov ecosystems in connection with industrial 
and agricultural development in its watershed. Voprocv 
Ikhtiology (The Problems of Ichthyology). Ac. of Sci., 

USST, V. 6. 1:33-47. (In Russian; English translation, 
Scripta Technica, Wiley & Sons, 1986). 

Vorovich, I.A., Gorstko, A.B., and Dombrovsky, U.A., 1981: 

Rational use of the Sea of Azov resources: mathematical 
modeling. Nauka ("Science"), Moscow, 359pp. 

White, G. (ed.) 1977: Environmental Effects of Complex River 
Development . Boulder, CO. Westview Press. 

Zenkevitch, L. 1963: Biology of the Seas of the U.S.S.R. 

London, George Allen and Unwin, Ltd. 


62 

























THERMAL DYNAMICS OF ESTUARINE PHYTOPLANKTON: 

A CASE STUDY OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY 


James E. Cloern, Brian E. Cole, Raymond L.J. Wong 
and Andrea E. Alpine 
U.S. Geological Survey 


Abstract 


Detailed surveys throughout San Francisco Bay over an annual 
cycle (1980) show that seasonal variations of phytoplankton 
biomass, community composition, and productivity can differ 
markedly among estuarine habitat types. For example, in the 
river-dominated northern reach (Suisun Bay), phytoplankton 
seasonality is characterized by a prolonged summer bloom of 
netplanktonic diatoms that results from the accumulation of 
suspended particulates at the convergence of nontidal currents 
(i.e. where residence time is long). Here turbidity is persis¬ 
tently high, such that phytoplankton growth and productivity are 
severely limited by light availability, the phytoplankton popula¬ 
tion turns over slowly, and biological processes appear to be 
less important mechanisms of temporal change than physical pro¬ 
cesses associated with freshwater inflow and turbulent mixing. 
South Bay, in contrast, is a lagoon-type estuary less directly 
coupled to the influence of river discharge. Residence time is 
long (months) in this estuary, turbidity is lower and estimated 
rates of population growth is high (up to 1-2 doublings d” 1 ) 
but the rapid production of phytoplankton biomass is presumably 
balanced by grazing losses to benthic herbivores. Exceptions 
occur for brief intervals (days to weeks) during spring when the 
water column stratifies so that algae retained in the surface 
layer are uncoupled from benthic grazing, and phytoplankton 
blooms develop. The degree of stratification varies over the 
neap-spring tidal cycle, so South Bay represents an estuary 
where: (1) biological processes (growth, grazing) and a 

physical process (vertical mixing) interact to cause temporal 
variability of phytoplankton biomass; and (2) temporal vari¬ 
ability is highly dynamic because of the short-term variability 
of tides. Other mechanisms of temporal variability in estuarine 
phytoplankton include zooplankton grazing, exchanges of micro¬ 
algae between the sediment and water column, and horizontal 
dispersion, which transports phytoplankton from regions of high 
productivity (shallows) to regions of low productivity (deep 
channels). 

Multi-year records of phytoplankton biomass show that large 
deviations from the typical annual cycles observed in 1980 can 
occur, and that interannual variability is driven by variability 
of annual precipitation and river discharge. Here, too, the 
nature of this variability differs among estuary types. Blooms 
occur only in the northern reach when river discharge falls 


63 





within a narrow range. The summer biomass increase is absent 
during years of extreme drought (1977) or years of exceptionally 
high discharge (1982). In South Bay, however, there is a direct 
relationship between phytoplankton biomass and river discharge. 
As discharge increases so does the buoyancy input required for 
density stratification, and wet years are characterized by 
persisent and intense spring blooms. 

REFERENCES 


Cloern, J.E. and F.H. Nichols (eds.), 1985. Temporal Dynamics of 
an Estuary: San Francisco . D.W. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht, 
The Netherlands. 


64 





BENTHIC ECOLOGY AND HEAVY METAL ACCUMULATION 


Frederick H. Nichols 
U.S. Geological Survey 

Abstract 


The benthos of San Francisco Bay (the comrftunity of inverte¬ 
brates living in bottom sediments) is an important source of 
food for fish, birds, and humans, and is dominated by exotic 
species introduced during the past 130 years. These species are 
largely small, hardy, short-lived, rapidly-reproducing species 
(much like weeds) whose distributions and abundances vary widely 
in both space and time. As a result, they appear resilient in 
the face of both natural and human-induced disturbances. 

The Bay's benthic organisms are contaminated to varying 
degrees and, in some cases, physiologically affected by wastes. 
Contaminant concentrations vary seasonally, annually, and with 
proximity to contaminant sources. There is an apparent but not 
clearly understood relationship between river flow and the 
accumulation of wastes in the estuary's sediments and organisms. 
However, effects at the community level are not easily distin¬ 
guished from natural variability. 

Variations in river flow can have a marked effect on the 
distributions and abundance of benthic animals, thereby affect¬ 
ing local food web dynamics. During periods of persistently low 
flow, for example, benthic invertebrates can become relatively 
more important in the northern part of San Francisco Bay and, as 
a result, compete with the small pelagic animals (that are food 
for fish) for the phytoplankton produced there. The benthos is 
apparently important in preventing eutrophication in San 
Francisco Bay by consuming phytoplankton before it can grow to 
nuisance levels. 


Introduction 


The "benthos" is the community of invertebrate animals 
(worms, clams, shrimps, etc.) living on the bottom of aquatic 
environments. These animals consume organic matter that grows 
on or settles to the bottom and, in turn, become food for fish 
and other consumers, including humans. They are often sessile, 
living most of their life in the same location. Thus, they 
provide a continuing record, through changes in species composi¬ 
tion or abundance or the effects of both short- and long-term 
changes in the environment. This feature had lead to their use 
as indicators of water pollution. 

Introduced Species 

Today, the benthos of San Francisco Bay is composed largely 
of introduced exotic species, many having arrived with the 


65 






oysters that were shipped from the U.S. East Coast for growing 
in the Bay. Others arrived in ballast water or burrowed into 
the wood hulls of ships arriving from ports all over the world 
(Carlton, 1979). These are hardy, opportunistic species, much 
like weed plants, that are seemingly resilient to disturbance. 

They may be temporarily eliminated from a given location in the 
Bay as a result of some natural (e.g., a storm or a prolonged 
wet or dry period) or human-induced (dredging) disturbance. How¬ 
ever, these animals typically return soon after the disturbance 
has ceased. It is against this background of high variability 
and apparent resilience that we must assess human effects. 

Effects of Waste Discharge 

The effects of waste discharge into the Bay were noted as 
early as 1900, when oyster beds were observed to be contaminated 
with human and industrial sewage. Soon thereafter, the taste of 
the harvested oysters began to deteriorate, and growth was im¬ 
paired. By the 1930s, the oyster industry had failed. Through 
the 1950s, raw or poorly treated sewage killed bottom organisms 
through lack of oxygen, and shellfish were contaminated with hu¬ 
man enteric bacteria. Beginning in the 1960s, the construction 
of facilities to treat waste began to resolve the oxygen and 
coliform bacteria problems, and by the 197 0s, these problems had 
been largely resolved (Nichols et. al. 1986). 

Now, industrial chemicals (some of which are known to be 
toxic) have become the primary concern. The tissues of mussels 
and clams contain varying levels of industrial chemicals depend¬ 
ing on their proximity to sources of contaminants, time of year 
and, apparently, the relative rate of freshwater inflow. For 
example, concentrations of the trace metal silver (a contaminant 
whose sources are largely the photographic and electronics in¬ 
dustries) in South Bay clams vary seasonally and between years 
(Luoma et. al . 1985). Highest seasonal levels are found fol¬ 
lowing the initial storms and runoff of winter while highest 
annual levels are found during driest years, These results 
suggest that river flow is important in the assimilation and/or 
flushing of contaminants from the Bay. However, the mechanisms 
are not well understood. Experimental studies have shown that, 
through genetic flexibility, some individuals within a species 
can survive in environments with high contaminant levels while 
other cannot (Luoma et. al . 1983). These studies have demon¬ 
strated that clams are physiologically stressed during periods 
when contaminant levels in the environment are highest. 

Despite clear evidence that individuals of many species 
contain contaminants, we have difficulty demonstrating a re¬ 
lationship between contaminated individuals and a threatened 
population. That is, we have not clearly demonstrated that 
there have been significant declines in either the abundance of 
the species Bay-wide or in the importance of these species in 
the Bay's food webs because of contamination with toxic 
chemicals. This difficulty results from: (1) the extreme 


66 



variability in the seasonally and interannual patterns of abun¬ 
dance that are most easily ascribed to natural causes; (2) the 
apparently hardy nature of many of the species; and (3) the lack 
of appropriate studies to prove or disprove cause and effect 
(Nichols et. al .. 1986). 

Effects of the Benthos on the Pelagic Food Web 

Because the estuary is shallow and the water in it well 
mixed, phytoplankton (microscopic single-celled plants growing 
in the water column that form the base of aquatic food webs) are 
directly available to benthic animals that filter food particles 
out of the water. Because of their great abundance, benthic fil¬ 
ter feeders may act as a natural biological control on eutrophi¬ 
cation -- the growth of nuisance phytoplankton blooms in aquatic 
systems in response to enrichment with nutrients such as nitro¬ 
gen and phosphorus (Cloern, 1982). Eutrophication in estuaries 
often leads to the depletion of oxygen in the water and the sub¬ 
sequent death of aquatic animals. By removing phytoplankton as 
fast as they grow, benthic invertebrates in San Francisco Bay 
convert sewage-derived nutrients directly into animal biomass. 
Thus, the Bay is not subject to noxious accumulations of excess 
phytoplankton (Nichols et. al. 1986). We can conclude from this 
finding that processes that could selectively disturb the ben¬ 
thos, such as severe contamination with pollutants, might permit 
the development of nuisance blooms and anoxia in San Francisco 
Bay. Occasionally, localized, thick mats of decaying macroalgae 
become deposited on intertidal mudflats and smother resident 
benthic animals (Nichols and Thompson, 1985). These occurrences 
are unpredictable and only partially understood. 

Whether the direct removal of phytoplankton by benthic 
filter feeders actually inhibit overall productivity of the 
estuary is not clear. However, during the 1976-77 drought, the 
high salinity of northern San Francisco Bay during two 
successive winters permitted the establishment of large 
populations of benthic animals that, in turn, may have been 
responsible for the unusual declines in phytoplankton, 
zooplankton, shrimp, and larval striped bass (Nichols, 1985). 

The implication from these observations is that during any 
future periods of persistently low flows when winter salinity 
levels remain high, the food web in northern San Francisco Bay 
may shift from pelagic type, culminating in the striped bass, to 
a benthic type, culminating perhaps, in less important demersal 
fish species. 


67 




REFERENCES 


Carlton, J.T. 1979: Introduced invertebrates of San Francisco 
Bay. in T.J. Conomos, (ed.), San Francisco Bay, the 
Urbanized Estuary . Pacific Division, Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci., 
San Francisco, Calif, 427-444. 

Cloern, J.E. 1982: Does the benthos control phytoplankton 

biomass in south San Francisco Bay? Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 
9:191-202. 

Josselyn, M.N. and J.A. West, 1985: The disturbance and 

temporal dynamics of the estuarine macralgal community of 
San Francisco Bay. Hvdrobioloqia 129: 139-152. 

Luoma, S.N., D.J. Cain, K. Ho, and A. Hutchinson, 1983: 

Variable tolerance to copper in two species from San 
Francisco Bay. Mar. Environ. Res. 10: 209-222. 

Luoma, S.N., D.J. Cain, K. Ho, and C. Johansson, 1985: Temporal 
fluctuations of silver, copper, and zinc in the bivalve 
Macoma balthica in five stations in South San Francisco 
Bay. Hvdrobioloqia 129: 109-120. 

Nichols, F.H., 1985: Increased benthic grazing: an alternative 
explanation for low phytoplankton biomass in northern San 
Francisco Bay during the 1976-77 drought. Estuar. Coast. 
Shelf Sci. 21:379-388. 

Nichols, F.H., J.E. Cloern, S.N. Luoma, and D.H. Peterson, 1986: 
The modification of an estuary. Science 231:567-573. 

Nichols, F.H. and J.K. Thompson, 1985: Time scales of change in 
the San Francisco Bay benthos. Hvdrobioloqia 129:121-138. 


68 














AGENCY COOPERATION AND FISHERY STUDIES 

IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY 


Perry L. Herrgesell 

California Department of Fish and Game 


Abstract 


The people of California have been divided on many environ¬ 
mental issues, but governmental cooperation and coordination at 
both state and Federal levels is beginning to mitigate the im¬ 
pacts of this division. Four agencies (California Department of 
Water Resources, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. 
Bureau of Reclamation, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) have 
signed a Memorandum of Agreement that established the Inter¬ 
agency Ecological Study Program. This program has provided for 
the performance of studies necessary to obtain a thorough under¬ 
standing of the requirements of the fish and wildlife resources 
in the estuary and how these requirements relate to water pro¬ 
jects. This has helped bridge the gap between environmentalists 
and water developers. One of these interagency studies is 
documenting the importance of freshwater flows and water project 
activities to the Bay system downstream of the Delta. The Delta 
Outflow/San Francisco Bay Study has shown that fish and shrimp 
abundance and distributions appear to be related to freshwater 
inflows from the Delta. If divisive environmental issues are to 
be adequately resolved in California, continued studies as well 
as continued financial and political support are needed. Early 
results from the biological portion of the Delta Outflow Study 
must be quantified and related to results from the recently 
implemented hydrodynamic elements. Finally, a long standing 
controversy regarding the Federal Central Valley Project's role 
in protecting beneficial uses in the system has been resolved to 
the state's satisfaction in the Coordinated Operations Agreement 
(COA). 

The Bible describes how a group of people were led from 
Egypt and came to the waters of the Red Sea. The account re¬ 
lates that their leader raised his staff and divided the waters 
so that the people could pass through and escape destruction 
from their enemies. In California, this age-old story has been 
reversed. If one reviews the history of the state's water pol¬ 
icy development, he will find that water, through its unequal 
distribution in the state, has divided the people. Most of the 
population and, therefore, the political power resides in the 
relatively dry, southern part of the state, while most of the 
rainfall occurs in the northern part of the state and flows 
through the San Francisco Bay estuary to the Pacific Ocean. 


69 





Because of this fact divisions have developed between citizens 
of the north and south, between farmers, and the urban dwellers, 
between developers and environmentalists, and between politi¬ 
cians and the lay public. These groups became more polarized, 
when the Bureau of Reclamation in about 1951, and the State 
Department of Water Resources in about 1968, began diverting 
water from rivers in the northern part of the state, such as the 
Sacramento and the San Joaguin, for use in the south. 

One can make three basic points about California water and 
its management as it relates to fish and wildlife resources in 
California: (1) California is divided in many ways on many 

environmental issues, but government cooperation and coordina¬ 
tion, at both the state and Federal levels is beginning to 
mitigate the impact of this division; (2) multi-agency, scienti¬ 
fic fish and wildlife studies are documenting the importance of 
freshwater flows and water project activities on the Bay system; 
and (3) continued studies are needed, in addition to continued 
financial and political support, if divisive environmental 
issues are to be adequately resolved. 

Government Cooperation and Coordination 

In 1970, when it became common knowledge that fish and 
wildlife problems existed in the estuarine system, and that one 
of the factors responsible for those problems was the Federal 
Central Valley Project and the State Water Project, four state 
and Federal agencies executed an Interagency Memorandum of 
Agreement. These agencies were: the Department of Water 
Resources (DWR), California Department of Fish and Game (DF & G), 
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), and the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service (USFWS). The purpose of this agreement was to 
provide for the performance of studies that would be necessary 
to obtain a thorough understanding of the requirements of the 
fish and wildlife resources in the estuary. These studies also 
represented significant follow-up efforts to cooperative work 
that began early in the 1960s between the DWR and DF & G. 

All the agencies in this group agreed that it was necessary 
to define design and operation criteria for the projects, in 
order that resource protection could be assured. This coopera¬ 
tive alliance between water development agencies and fish and 
wildlife agencies was the first major fish and wildlife accom¬ 
plishment associated with water policy in California. 

The intent of this so-called "Interagency Ecological Study 
Program" was good, but true to California's divisive nature, the 
estuary was divided into two components, and only the upstream 
Delta portion of that system was studied in detail. Cooperative 
work was carried out during the early 1960s and 1970s and 
yielded much information about fishery resources and their 


70 



relationship to water diversion projects. Specifically, these 
studies and cooperative efforts learned six important things: 

(1) striped bass and pelagic fish eggs were being diverted from 
the system; (2) the louver fish screen efficiencies at the 
intake of state and Federal water diversions, depending on the 
species and life stages, were quite low, ranging from about 5 to 
80 percent, (3) water diversions act as density independent 
sources of mortality for young striped bass; (4) flow reversals 
which were associated with pumping confuse young adult fish 
migration; (5) pumping increases flow velocities in channels, 
and that in turn reduces the standing crop of food organisms 
that are produced there; and (6) the actual magnitude of flow 
passing through the Delta into the Bay affects the distribution 
and abundance of fish and their food organisms. 

This information was used for two significant purposes in 
California. First of all, it was used to develop recommenda¬ 
tions for the controversial Peripheral Canal. This was a 
structure proposed for diverting water around the Delta system 
for transport to the southern part of the state. Secondly, the 
information developed by the Interagency Program was used in 
1978 by the regulatory State Water Resources Control Board to 
develop standards to protect beneficial uses in the Delta 
component of the system. The Board adopted Water Rights 
Decision 1485, which innovatively established flow/salinity 
standards necessary to protect fishery resources in the estuary 
based on information available at that time. However, there was 
still division. The studies were looking at the Delta and not 
the Bay portion of the estuary. In adopting D-1485, the State 
Board took another positive step to bridge this division. They 
mandated, in D-1485, that flow studies would be carried out in 
the Bay, downstream of the Delta, and that these studies would 
be paid for by the water diversion permit holders; in this case, 
the Department of Water Resources and the Federal Bureau of 
Reclamation. The Interagency Program already in place became 
the vehicle to implement this study in 1980. 

Biological portions of the Delta Outflow/San Francisco Bay 
Study began in 1980, but again division occurred. This time, 
the division was regarding the roles of hydrodynamic and fishery 
studies. While the fishery studies continued, project 
biologists and engineers debated the following questions: "What 
should be the driving force for the Bay outflow study?" In 
other words, should biology precede hydrodynamic work and 
provide the basis for the structure of hydrodynamic study plans 
or should hydrodynamics precede biology? This issue remained 
unresolved for about four years until it was agreed that the 
hydrodynamic program should answer "biologically relevant 
hydrodynamic questions." In other words, the study would be 
based on the needs of the biological program. 

The hydrodynamic study plan which was implemented earlier by 
DWR was augmented in 1984 and interagency cooperation again 
bridged another division. At this time, two more agencies 


71 


joined the Interagency Program. Those agencies were the U.S. 
Geological Survey (USGS) and the State Water Resources Control 
Board (SWRCB). Today, a six agency program exists instead of a 
four agency program. 

The overall goal of the Delta Outflow/San Francisco Bay 
Study is to determine the relationship between freshwater 
outflows and fish and wildlife resources in the Bay, downstream 
of the Delta. In order to attain this goal, four general ob¬ 
jectives are being pursued. First of all, the study is deter¬ 
mining what elements of the Bay biota would be affected by signi¬ 
ficant changes of the inflow of freshwater from the Delta. 
Secondly, the project is determining how the flow reductions 
associated with the state and Federal project operations would 
change hydraulics and salinity gradients in the Bay. Thirdly, 
the effect of changes in hydraulics and salinity on the fish and 
wildlife resources in the Bay will be investigated. Finally, 
all this information will be used to develop flow and salinity 
standards (or other management strategies) if necessary to 
better protect fish and wildlife resources of the Bay. 

These objectives are being met through a twofold approach. 
First of all, fishery studies are being carried out in the Bay 
itself. By collecting monthly fishery samples at 3 5 locations 
in the Bay, the distributions and abundances of fish, shrimp, 
and crabs are being documented. This data will then be combined 
with output from the second aspect of the program -- the Hydro¬ 
dynamic/Physical/Chemical study. This recently expanded study 
element is evaluating changes in salinity and circulation 
patterns that are caused by outflow variation. These evalua¬ 
tions are being done using modeling work carried out by a 
five-member modeling team that is working under the technical 
supervision of Dr. Ralph Cheng, of the U.S. Geological Survey in 
Menlo Park, California. 

Parenthetically, the Interagency Program represents 
substantial funding commitments by the agencies involved. For 
example, the fiscal year 1985 budget for the Interagency Program 
is about $4,906,000. That money is allocated between five major 
programs including the San Francisco Bay/Delta Outflow Study. 

This study alone represents a budget of $1,655,000 for the 
coming year. 


Study Results 

To date, the fishery data collected in the outflow program 
have only been summarized for the first three years, but it is 
interesting because considerable variation in outflow has 
occurred during this year. The year 1981 was dry, while 1980 
and 1982 were wet years. Of the wet years, 1982 provided the 
highest amount of outflow to the bay. Additionally, the 
hydrographs for these years are characterized by pulse periods, 
when flows were considerably greater than other periods. These 
pulses are short-term high flows that move through the system, 
greatly altering physical conditions. 


72 



To date, about 109 species of fish have been collected from 
the Bay. These species have been distributed among 43 different 
families. More importantly, it appears that fish abundance and 
distributions are related to freshwater inflow from the Delta. 

For example, of the 58 species looked at so far, 24 demonstrated 
a "wet response" to flow. In other words, these species were 
caught in greater numbers during wet years. Twenty-two species 
showed a mixed response, while only 12 showed a dry response 
(Table 1). 


Table 1. Number of species with highest catches during 
various year types. 


Salinity Preference Wet 

_ Group _ Response 

Freshwater 3 

Anadromous 3 

Estuarine 5 

Marine-Estuarine 2 

TOTAL 24 


Mixed 

Response 

3 

3 
2 

4 

22 


Dry 

Response 

2 

1 

0 

2 

12 


A surprising thing was learned upon further analysis of 
these same data when individual species responses were cate¬ 
gorized (Table 2). Only one species in the top 15 most abundant 
species demonstrated a dry response. That species was the 
jacksmelt. This is interesting because one would expect greater 
numbers of marine species in the Bay during dry years. This did 
not occur. It is also interesting to note the estuarine species 
response (Table 2). Four of the five estuarine species col¬ 
lected occurred in the top 15 of the most abundant species in 
the Bay, and all of those species demonstrated a wet response 
showing the importance of freshwater flows to these types of 
species in San Francisco Bay. 

It also appears that outflow affects Bay shrimp abundance in 
San Francisco Bay. Abundance indices for this species were 
greater during wet years than during dry years. Preliminary 
study results also have led to the conclusions that some fish 
appear to be more widely distributed during wet years. 

There are two reasons why fish may change their 
distribution. First of all, they may change distribution 
because of salinity alterations. Salinity may increase or 
decrease above or below species salinity preferences and cause 
them to move to another area. 


73 









TABLE 2. Species response to water year type. Number in paren¬ 
theses is that fish's rank in the fifteen most abundant 
species. 


Wet Response 
Fresh 

Threadfin shad 
Carp 

Prickly sculpin 

Anadromous 

White sturgeon 
Green sturgeon 
Steelhead 


Dry Response 

Sacramento squawfish 
Tuleperch 

Pacific lamprey 


Mixed Response 


Inland silverside 

Splittail 

White catfish 


American shad (14) 
King salmon 
Striped bass (5) 


Estuarine 

Threespine stickleback 
Yellowfin goby (10) 
Longfin smelt (2) 
Staghorn sculpin (8) 
Starry flounder (12) 


Marine-estuarine 

Pacific herring (3) 
Cheekspot goby 


Marine 

Leopard shark 
Pile perch 

Speckled sanddab (7) 
Diamond turbot 
Sand sole 
California tongue- 
fish 

Brown smoothound 
Spiny dogfish 
Pacific tomcod 
Topsmelt 
Showy snailfish 


Arrow goby 
Walleye surfperch (1) 


Bat ray 

Whitre seaperch 
Jacksmelt (13) 

Black perch 
Rubberlip seaperch 
Pacific butterfish 
Boneyhead sculpin 


Delta smelt 
Bay goby (11) 


White croaker (9) 
Northern anchovy 
Plainfin midshipman 
(15) 

Shiner perch (4) 


Night smelt 
Bay pipefish 
Barred surfperch 
Brown rockfish 
Lingcod 

English sole (6) 
Dwarf perch 
Big skate 
Surf smelt 
Curlfin turbot 


74 










Secondly, circulation patterns can affect the distribution 
of the larval stages of many fish. Larval English sole distri¬ 
butions appear to reflect outflow related circulation changes. 
English sole spawn offshore in the Pacific Ocean. Adult sole 
usually do not occur in San Francisco Bay. The larvae spawned 
offshore presumably are carried by gravitational circulation 
into the Bay. The magnitude of that circulation is related to 
the magnitude of Delta outflow. Data from 1980-1983 showed that 
the distribution of larval sole (3-5 mm) was broader during the 
high flow years than during the low flow year. During the year, 
larval sole occurred only near the mouth of the Bay, near the 
ocean, while during the high flows (1983) larvae were found 
throughout San Pablo and South Bays. 

Early study efforts also have found that large, freshwater 
pulses move through the system in winter and spring and signifi¬ 
cantly lower salinity in this system. These salinity changes 
affect fish distribution. As a rule, pelagic species (e.g., 
northern anchovy) normally found in the Delta, Suisun and San 
Pablo Bays during dry periods move downstream after these 
pulses. On the other hand, some bottom species (e.g., juvenile 
English sole) usually found in Central Bay move upstream during 
these events. 

It also has been found that flow altered distributions of 
certain species result in increased abundance of these species. 
For example, a major cause of the year-to-year variation in 
abundance of Crangon shrimp appears to be survival of the early 
life stages (i.e., the larvae or juvenile), not to the number of 
reproductive females present. It has further been found that 
distribution of the adults that is affected by the flows varies 
between the years. In wetter years, the reproductive population 
is further downstream near the Golden Gate. The survival of the 
juveniles is much higher there. It appears that flow affects 
distribution of adults, which in turn sets abundance for the 
year because more juveniles survive. 

Future Project Needs 

The above provides a quick, general summary of the 
accomplishments of the Interagency Program and the findings of 
the Delta Outflow Study, in particular. The remainder of this 
review will emphasize future project needs. 

In order to ensure protection of San Francisco Bay 
resources, various things are needed. More information on water 
quality or pollution impacts on fishery resources in the Bay is 
desperately needed. The Delta Outflow Study has documented flow 
related effects, but little is being done to determine effects 
of various waste discharges on fish and shrimp. Once again this 
points to a division of study effort. One effort to study 
pollution in the Bay by the Aquatic Habitat Institute is being 
planned, but without strong local or Federal financial support, 
this program will not be productive. 


75 




Other scientific needs exist and the Delta Outflow Study 
will be fulfilling these needs in the future. For example, the 
study has discovered some of the qualitative relationships 
between fishery resources and freshwater flows, but these re¬ 
lationships must be confirmed and quantified . In other words, 
how much of a population reduction or increase results if 
outflows are reduced by some amount? Reported amounts of 
reduction in other systems that have caused adverse responses 
range up to approximately 47 percent. In an average rainfall 
year, approximately 50 percent has been diverted from San 
Francisco Bay. The study also must develop some predictive 
capability, through simple fishery models, to be used when the 
regulatory agencies eventually set protective standards. 

The Outflow Study also will need to document relationships 
between fishery resources and circulation/hydrodynamic patterns. 
Some organisms use circulation processes for transportation of 
their young, but the quantitative relationships between outflows 
and these processes are unknown. Beyond that, it must be deter¬ 
mined whether any observed flow-related circulation changes will 
impact those organisms known to use currents in the Bay and if 
so, whether or not such impacts will be detrimental. 

Policy needs for San Francisco Bay center around two 
issues. First, in California a long standing controversy re¬ 
garding the role of the Federal Central Valley Project in 
protecting beneficial uses has been debated. This issue has 
recently been resolved to the state's satisfaction in the 
Coordinated Operations Agreement (COA). Congress must act on 
this Agreement. Second, continued funding support from the USBR 
to continue the outflow studies is desperately needed. Study 
contracts are renewed each year and, from time-to-time, the 
project has been threatened due to budget cuts in the Bureau 
program. Long-term, financial support is needed to continue 
these important studies. 

In conclusion, California is a divided state, but through 
agency coordination and cooperation, and also some sound 
scientific studies, progress is being made toward protecting 
and, in fact, in some cases, enhancing fish and wildlife 
resources. 


76 



THE IMPACTS OF ESTUARINE DEGRADATION AND CHRONIC POLLUTION 
ON POPULATIONS OF ANADROMOUS STRIPED BASS (MORONE SAXATILIS) 
IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY-DELTA. CALIFORNIA: 

A SUMMARY 


Jeannette A. Whipple, R. Bruce MacFarlane 
Maxwell B. Eldridge, and Pete Benville, Jr. 
Tiburon Fisheries Laboratory 
NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service 


Introduction 


When most of us think of pollution effects on the marine 
environment, we are likely to think of dramatic events such as 
major tanker accidents and oil spills, or fish kills resulting 
from sewage effluents and toxic spills. These incidents are 
highly visible and receive considerable public attention. There 
is no doubt that such occurrences are damaging to the marine 
environment and warrent concern about the protection of that 
environment. 

Unfortunately, we may be deluded into thinking that if we 
prevent or ameliorate damage from such catastrophic events, our 
pollution problems have been solved. If we do this, we overlook 
a potentially greater problem -- that is continual or chronic 
input of pollutants at lower levels. For example, in the 1960s, 
there was considerable activity leading to decreased sewage 
pollution of San Francisco Bay. This was certainly commendable, 
but also led to the impression that our pollution problems were 
over. Little attention was paid to the less visible and poten¬ 
tially more harmful effects of increasing pollution from "water- 
soluble" chemicals. 

The long-range effects of chronic exposure to pollutants on 
our aquatic resources are still relatively unknown. Levels of 
pollutants, in this situation, are lower but more prevalent. 
Effects, if they occur, are more subtle, yet the damage to our 
resources may be considerable and, in many cases, irreversible. 

It is difficult to study effects of chronic pollution for a 
number of reasons. First, most marine ecosystems potentially 
impacted by pollutants are inherently complex and variable in 
space and time. Many ecosystems are described incompletely, 
either qualitatively or quantitatively, and even under com¬ 
pletely natural conditions. Natural perturbations may exceed 
those induced by man's influence. For example, in 1983 the El 
Nino off the coast of California resulted in warm water 
conditions and significant alterations in distribution and 
survival of coastal fishes. This makes it very difficult to 
detect alterations in the environment ascribable to pollution, 
and even harder to predict them. 


77 









A second difficulty arises from the complex array of dif¬ 
ferent pollutants occurring in the marine environment, parti¬ 
cularly in estuarine ecosystems such as San Francisco Bay-Delta, 
which are most affected by man. 

Finally, sublethal effects of low pollutant concentrations 
on organisms are subtle and difficult to quantify on an indi¬ 
vidual or population level; their detection also may be obscured 
by inherent species variability such as age, sex, or genetic 
differences. 

A solution to this intricate problem requires a long-term, 
cooperative effort. The goal of the Physiological Ecology 
Investigation at Tiburon Laboratory has been to contribute to an 
understanding of the long-term ecological consequences of 
pollutant effect on aquatic resources. Specifically, we were 
concerned with developing knowledge of effects of chronic 
low-level pollutants on fisheries. Although the understanding 
of fate and effects of pollutants in the marine environment has 
increased in the past 20 years, this knowledge is still limited 
primarily to acute effects of single pollutants or pollutant 
classes. Little is known of chronic, interactive effects of pol¬ 
lutants within and between pollutant classes. Most effects 
studies are limited to the laboratory; little information exists 
on the quantitative effect of pollutants on a population level. 
Finally, few studies address the interactions of pollutants with 
inherent characteristics of the species or with other environ¬ 
mental factors. 

In order to to describe source of variability in pollutant 
effects on striped bass more completely, we used techniques of 
multivariate analysis similar to those used in epidemiology. We 
were then able to refine the data to determine the best methods 
for measuring pollutant effects in both the field and in labora¬ 
tory experiments. 

Our approach concentrated on "easy to measure" and/or "sensi¬ 
tive" characteristics of the organisms which appeared to cor¬ 
relate with pollutant burdens. Initially, the measurements were 
on several levels -- from the biochemical to the subsample (popu¬ 
lation) level. After preliminary studies, the most sensitive 
variables were delineated. Selected groups of variables 
(factors) were then designated as measures of body conditions, 
liver condition, and egg condition. Eventually, these factors 
coefficients were translated into an overall assessment of the 
health of the organism. The coefficients also can be used to 
estimate quantitative effects on a population level, such as 
reductions in growth, reproduction, and survival. Some of the 
measurements are also more sensitive and consequently more 
effective in giving us an early warning that individuals and/or 
the population are stressed. Ultimately, we hope to synthesize 
the results into a model of the impacts of long-term chronic 
pollution on "natural" mortality rates and resulting changes in 
the population of the affected fishery. 


78 


The following questions were asked when formulating our 
research plans. In this summary, the questions are placed 
within the context of the Office of Marine Pollution Assessment* 
Research Program Conceptual Organization (Figure 1): 

Anthropogenic Activities 

1. Which pollutants are potentially impacting our marine 
resources, including fisheries? 

2. What are the sources of these pollutants? 

Marine Ecosystem Processes 

3. What are the interactive effects of the pollutants on 
fishes? How are they related to other ecosystem pro¬ 
cesses, such as variation in outflow and diversion? 

Consequences Attribute to Anthropogenic Activities 

4. Are there effects on fish attributable to chronic pol¬ 
lutant exposures? 

5. If so, what are the effects and which measurements pro¬ 
vide the most sensitive and specific assessment of 
them? 

6. Are the effects reversible? Are there either short¬ 
term or long-term irreversible effects on individuals 
and populations? 

Judgemental Processes 

7. What are the quantitative reductions in populations in 
growth, reproduction, and survival attributable to 
pollutants? 

8. Can these effects be predicted? 

9. What recommendations based on our results can be made 
to management and regulators for the decisions neces¬ 
sary to regulate anthropogenic activities deleteriously 
affecting fisheries? 

Other Compartments 

10. Other compartments in the conceptual representation 

Figure 1 are within the purview of management 

*0MPA is now the Ocean Assessment Division of the National Ocean¬ 
ic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 


79 








Figure 1. Conceptual representation of Office of Marine 
Pollution Assessment Research Program. From R.E. Burns, 
January 19, 1982. "Office of Marine Pollution Assessment 
(OMPA) Financial Assistance for Marine Pollution Research." 


80 














In June 1980, the Cooperative Striped Bass Study (COSBS) 
team was organized to examine different aspects of the above 
questions (Jung and Bowes, 1980; Jung et,. al. 1981; Whipple, 
Crosby, and Jung, 1983; Whipple et. al . 1984; Jung, Whipple, and 
Moser, 1984). 

At the Tiburon Laboratory, we concentrated on the affects of 
pollutants on striped bass populations (4 through 8, above). 

From this research, a number of recommendations have been made 
(9 above). The State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) 
stressed work on the anthropogenic sources of pollutants found 
in the striped bass and identification of the pollutants (1 and 
2 above), funded additional studies on effects of pollutants and 
parasites, (4 through 8), and took a number of management ac¬ 
tions (10 above). The California Department of Fish and Game 
(CDFG) also participated in management decisions (10 above). 

There were a number of excellent reasons for selecting the 
striped bass as a model species in the San Francisco Bay-Delta 
ecosystem. The striped bass is a long-lived fish (approximately 
2 0 years) and at all ages appears to accumulate relatively high 
levels of pollutants. It is a tertiary carnivore and accumu¬ 
lates pollutants throughout the food chain. Striped bass are 
also very euryhalone, occurring in offshore marine areas, estu¬ 
aries, and in freshwater. They occur on all coasts of the Unit¬ 
ed States and have been introduced in other countries. This 
fishery is also of great commercial and recreational value. 

The major reason for studying striped bass, however, was the 
long-term decline on this population in the area, as well as in 
most other estuaries of the United States. We suggest that at 
least part of the decline may be because of the interactive dele¬ 
terious effects of anthropogenic factors, such as water 
diversion and pollution. 

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) biologists 
have studied the striped bass population in the San Francisco 
Bay-Delta estuary for about 40 years. Their work provided the 
framework for studies of this species, particularly in the 
field. The initial results of CDFG studies revealed a high cor¬ 
relation between outflow from the Delta and survival of striped 
bass to "young-of-the-year" or juvenile stage. A correlation 
also existed between the percentage of water diverted south 
through the California aqueduct system and survival of juve¬ 
niles. On the basis of these correlations, CDFG was able for 
some years to predict survival of juveniles and recruitment to 
the fishery. These predictions became less reliable in later 
years (since approximately 1975), although outflow and diversion 
remain major controlling factors in survival. Figure 2A shows 
the decline in survival to juvenile striped bass in both the 
Suisun Bay and central Delta nursery areas; Figure 2B shows the 
decline in adult striped bass (from Stevens et. al. 1985). 


81 


120 



0 

g 

•H 


I o 


G 4-1 

0 


0 

o 

Q 


•H 

1 



■P 

Cn 



0 

G 

• 


iH 

G 

P 


G 

0 

0 


C4>H 

0 


0 


>1 


a 

• 

J2 


,—. 

, —. 

-P 


C/1 

ID 

•H 



CO 

£ 


.-H 

on 



•H 

r-H 

X 


■P 


0 


0 

•• 

■0 


X 

• 

G 


cd 

i—i 

•H 


a) 

fd 

0 


0 

+> 

.G 


G 

0 

-P 


0 




P 

cn 

G 


0 

G 

•H 


2 

0 




> 

0 



0 

Cn 


0 

-P 

G 


cn 

CO 

0 


fd 

'—- 

.G 


A 

fd 

U 


Ti 

0 



0 

p 

--- 


a 

0 

0 


•H 


0 


p 

0 r—| 


-p 

-P 

•H 


cn 

r—\ 

G 



0 

0 


0 

Q 

> 


.G 

1 

G 


-P 

>rn 



0 

-—- 


G 

PQ 


• 

•H 


0 

ID 


0 

0 

r- 

0 

o 

0 

cn 

G 

0 

i—i 

•H 

•H 



i—1 

U T3 

0 

o 

G 

0 

O 

0 

0 

O. G 

Q 

P 

•H 

•H 


Pm 

P 

in 



-P 


• 

G 

0 t5 

< 

0 


0 

CN 

CO 

p 

o 



0 

G 

0 

0 

0 

G 

P .C 

>1 0 

G 

■P 

i 

G 

Cn 

0 

0 

•H 

G *1 

P 


•H 

-p 

a. 


o 

O 


o o o 

00 CO rt 


O O 
<N 


ssva Q3diais DNflOA do xbqni 


82 















































































































CM 04 

(suojiijui) 31VIAII1S3 BONVONfiav (spuesnolU) 

X3QNI 30NVQNnaV 


83 


Figure 2B. Two measures of adult striped bass population size; 
change in Peterson and catch-per-unit effort estimates of adult 
bass with year. Decline obvious from 1975. (Stevens et.al ., 1985) 























The interaction of yearly temporal variation in net flow 
with spatial variation in spawning and nursery habitats appeared 
to be a major factor in the annual variation in survival of 
striped bass. We hypothesized that in critically low water 
years, or when certain pollutant "events", such as spills, 
occurred during spawning migration, this spatial-temporal equi¬ 
librium was disturbed. When this happened, the effects of 
pollutants and other environmental stress factors appeared to 
play a larger role in contributing to the mortality of striped 
bass. This system was thought of as a "model" for the inter¬ 
action of the anthropogenic stressors of water diversion and 
pollutants. 

To begin research, we derived the following specific goals: 

1. To determine the consequences of chronic pollutants 
impacting a fishery's population. 

2. To use striped bass, an apparently declining population in 
the San Francisco Bay ecosystem, as a "model species" for 
such a study. 

3. To compare the San Francisco Bay-Delta striped bass popula¬ 
tion to other populations less impacted and more impacted 
by pollutants. 

4. To determine the condition or health of striped bass 
caught in the field, and if in poor condition, to deter¬ 
mine correlation with pollutant burdens in tissues. 

5. To do laboratory studies to corroborate field-determined 
correlations between fish condition and pollutant burdens. 

6. To formulate a quantitative model showing relationships 
between pollutants and the condition of the bass popula¬ 
tion in terms of reductions in growth, reproduction, and 
survival. 

7. To provide recommendations to appropriate agencies in¬ 
volved with management of fisheries, specifically, the 
striped bass fishery, and to agencies responsible for the 
maintenance of water quality and the health of marine 
ecosystems. 

8. To cooperate with other agencies in determining the main 
sources of pollutants deleteriously affecting striped 
bass. 

9. To cooperate with other agencies in determining the pol¬ 
lutant burdens in striped bass potentially harmful to 
human health. 


84 


10 . 


To cooperate with other agencies in determining the re¬ 
lationship of pollutant effects on striped bass to other 
ecosystem processes, e.g., water outflow and diversion and 
other species in the striped bass food chain. 

11. To make field tests of predictive models. 

The results here are updated from a previous report 
(Whipple, 1984) and summarized from a manuscript in prepara¬ 
tion: "A multivariate approach to studying the interactive 

effects of inherent and environmental factors, including pol¬ 
lutants, on striped bass in the San Francisco Bay-Delta, Cali¬ 
fornia" by Jeannette A. Whipple, R. Bruce MacFarlane, Maxwell B. 
Eldridge, and Pete E. Benville, Jr. 

Methods 


We have examined approximately 500 fish captured in the 
field from the San Francisco Bay-Delta (400); the Coos River, 
Oregon (41); Lake Mead, Nevada (30); and from the Hudson River, 
New York (26). Techniques of histopathological examination and 
autopsy have been developed to assess the health of striped bass 
and to continue annual monitoring (Whipple, et. al . 1984). 
Approximately 350 characteristics of the fish were examined 
initially -- from the biochemical level to organ system and in¬ 
dividual organism levels -- to determine the best measures of 
health. Subsamples were taken of liver, ovaries and muscles to 
determine burdens for the following major classes of pollutants: 
petrochemicals or petroleum hydrocarbons (monocyclic aromatics, 
polycyclic aromatics), chlorinated hydrocarbons (including PCBs, 
toxaphene, DDT, and its metabolites and others), and heavy 
metals (copper, iron, zinc, cadmium, mercury, lead, nickel, and 
others). Tissues were also scanned for EPA's priority 
pollutants. 

Multivariate statistical techniques, including principal 
component factor analysis (Nie, 1975), were applied to the field 
data to determine correlations between sets of variables describ¬ 
ing conditions and the pollutant burdens. The following summary 
of results includes correlations and regressions found signifi¬ 
cant in multiple regression analyses at the P < .05 level or 
less. Several laboratory experiments were performed to verify 
correlations seen in field fish (Jung, Whipple, and Moser, 

1984). 


Results and Discussion 


The following summary of specific results apply to the 
goals above: 

1 . Location . There were differences among locations. The 

greatest proportion of the variability was attributable to 
different sampling locations. Thus, factor analyses were 
separated by location before assessing the other vari¬ 
ability. 


85 





o 


Fish from the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary were in 
poorer health or condition than fish from the Coos 
River, Oregon. A 1982 sample indicated that Hudson 
River fish were also in better health than those from 
the San Francisco Bay-Delta. 

o Comparisons with samples from Lake Mead, Nevada 

showed that fish from Lake Mead were definitely less 
parasitized and had lower pollutant burdens than 
those from the San Francisco Bay-Delta system. Lake 
Mead fish, on the other hand, had poor body condi¬ 
tion, indicating starvation and insufficient food. 

o Fish from the San Francisco Bay-Delta had higher 

tissue concentrations and a greater number of sepa¬ 
rate petrochemical compounds than did those from the 
Coos River, Oregon or the Hudson River, N.Y., except 
for some xylenes, which were relatively high in all 
populations of fish sampled. 

o Fish from the Coos River had the lowest concentra¬ 
tions of chlorinated hydrocarbons and heavy metals. 

o Fish from the Hudson River had higher concentrations 
of PCBs in gonads and muscle, and higher concentra¬ 
tions of chlordane and dieldrin in gonads than did 
San Francisco Bay-Delta fish. 

o Fish from the San Francisco Bay-Delta had higher 
levels of copper, zinc, cadmium, and nickel in 
gonads; higher levels of copper, zinc, mercury, and 
nickel in liver. Hudson River fish had higher levels 
of mercury in gonads and muscle and higher cadmium in 
liver. 

o Lesions caused by host reactions to cestode or 

tapeworm larval parasites ( Lacistorhvnchus tenuis ) 
were found only from the San Francisco Bay-Delta. 

The concentrations of several other types of 
parasites were also higher in fish from the San 
Francisco Bay-Delta area than in fish from any other 
area. Hudson River fish had a totally different 
parasite assemblage than fish from the West coast. 

o Egg condition in fish from the San Francisco Bay- 

Delta was significantly poorer than in fish from any 
other area sampled. 

o Fish from San Joaquin River were in poorer condition 
than those from the Sacramento River, showing de¬ 
creased body condition, higher levels of cestode 
larvae, and higher concentrations of zinc and other 
metals. 


86 




o 


Results show that it is difficult to find a "control 
population" for comparison with the California popu¬ 
lation because all examined so far have been impacted 
in some way by pollutants and/or have significant 
environmental differences. Nevertheless, of all popu¬ 
lations examined, the San Francisco Bay/Delta fish 
appear in the worst health. 

2. Sex . Although most fish sampled were females, both sexes 
were impacted. Because sexes were sampled differently, 
and because of strong sexual differences, sexes were also 
separated in the factor analysis. 

o Males had higher levels of petrochemicals and PCBs in 
the liver and primarily toluene in testes. 

o Females had higher levels of petrochemicals in 

ovaries, higher levels of metals in all tissues and 
higher levels of PCBs in ovaries than males had in 
testes. 

o Body and liver condition was poorer in males than in 
females. 

3. Other Factors . After location and sex, a large proportion 
of the variation (in the selected variable data base) was 
accounted for by the factors of age, color pattern, sexual 
maturity, pollutants, year, the time in the prespawning 
season, and parasites. An example of factor analysis 
results is given for the San Joaquin River from 1978-1983 
Table 1. 

o Year. Concentrations of petrochemicals varied with 
year (1978 to 1984) of sampling (Table 2). Most 
separate compounds and higher levels were found in 
striped bass in 1978, 1979, and 1981. Some fish from 
all years, however, contained petrochemicals (except 
small sample of 7 fish in 1982). Cestode larvae and 
lesions varied yearly and related to age and sexual 
maturity of adults. Egg condition was poorest in 
1978, 1979, and 1981, correlating significantly with 
petrochemical concentrations in the liver and ova¬ 
ries. 

o Age. Older fish were in poorer condition, with 
reduced fecundity, higher parasites loads, and 
greater concentrations of some pollutants, 
particularly PCBs and metals. 

o Color pattern type. There were different growth and 
reproduction rates, body proportions, and pollutant 
and parasite burdens in fish of different color 
pattern type (e.g. solid-striped, broken-striped, 
etc.). 


87 




Table 1. -- Factor analysis results for prespawning striped bass. 
Proportion of variance in data base accounted for by different factors, 
or sets of variables. San Joaquin River prespawning females (n=157 
fish); 1978-1983. The names of factors indicate the major controlling 
variables in factor sets. 


PROPORTION OF VARIANCE 
FACTOR % ACCUMULATIVE % 


1 

AGE, WET WEIGHT 

10 

10 

2 

COLOR PATTERN-GENERAL 

9 

19 

3 

SEXUAL MATURITY 

8 

27 

4 

PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS: 

(Gonad & Liver-o-Xylene) 

7 

34 

5 

YEAR 

6 

40 

6 

CHLORINATED HYDROCARBONS: 

(Gonad & Liver-PCB’s) 

5 

45 

7 

CHLORINATED HYDROCARBONS: 

(Gonad & Liver-DDT) 

5 

50 

8 

TIME, TEMPERTURE 

4 

54 

9 

PARASITES-CESTODE LESIONS 

4 

58 

10 

YEAR 

3 

61 

11 

METALS:Liver-(LSI) 

3 

64 

12 

PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS: 

(Gonad-Ethylbenzene, m-Xylene) 

3 

67 

13 

SEXUAL MATURITY 

3 

70 

14 

PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS: 

(Liver-Ethylbenzene, 

1,2-Dimethylcyclohexane) 

2 

72 

15 

BODY CONDITION 

2 

74 

16 

PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS: 

2 

7 6 


(Liver-Benzene, m-Xylene, 

_ 1.2-Bimvlcyclohexane ) _ 

INHERENT FACTORS ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS UNIDENTIFIED 

NATURAL FACTORS POLLUTANT FACTORS 
32%17%27% 24% 


FACTOR 

NO. FACTOR NAME 


88 














Table 2. Year factor; ranked differences among years in inherent 
characteristics, environmental variables and condition of striped bass. 
Based on factor analyses of prespawning female striped bass collected from 
April to June; San Joaquin River. Loadings on factors greater than or 
equal to 0.30. Ranked from highest (1) to lowest (7) total mean values. 

NS = not sampled; NM = sampled, but not measured. 


YEAR1 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 19842 

<N) (59) (42) (21) (12) ( 7) (16) (21) 

VARIABLE - - - - - - - 


Inherent Factors 


Age 

2 

4 

7 

1 

3 

6 

5 

Color Pattern 

6 

3 

1 

5 

4 

2 

2 

(Stripe Breakage) 

(8.5) 

(9.9) 

(10.5) 

(9.0) 

(9.1) 

(10.1) 

(10.1 

Environmental Factors 







Outflow 

4 

5 

3 

5 

2 

1 

? 

Diversion 

2 

1 

2 

1 

3 

4 

? 

Petroleum HC- 








Monocyclic Aromatics; 







Gonad 

4 

2 

5 

1 

6 

3 

NM 

Liver 

Petroleum HC- 

3 

5 

6 

1 

4 

2 

6 

Alicyclic hexanes 







Gonad 

3 

2 

5 

3 

5 

1 

5 

Liver 

3 

2 

5 

4 

5 

1 

5 

Metals-Gonad 








Copper 

1 

NS 

3 

2 

NM 

NM 

NM 

Zinc 

2 

NS 

3 

1 

NM 

NM 

NM 

Metals-Liver 








Copper 

NS 

NS 

3 

2 

NM 

NM 

1 

Zinc 

NS 

NS 

3 

2 

NM 

NM 

1 

Cadmium 

NS 

NS 

NS 

2 

NM 

NM 

1 

Chromium 

NS 

NS 

NS 

1 

NM 

NM 

2 

Mercury 

NS 

NS 

NS 

1 

NM 

NM 

2 

Selenium 

NS 

NS 

NS 

2 

NM 

NM 

1 

Parasites 

Tapeworm Larvae 

6 

5 

2 

6 

1 

4 

3 

Tapeworm Lesions 

4 

1 

3 

2 

5 

1 

4 

Tapeworm Rafts 

6 

1 

4 

5 

6 

3 

2 

Total Parasite3 
Severity 

2 

2 

5 

4 

1 

4 

3 

Condition Factors 








♦Egg Resorption 

1 

2 

4 

2 

6 

3 

5 

(More resorbed eggs and 

ovaries 

and abnormalities 

, less 

delayed 


maturation). 








1 Sample sizes in 

1981 

and 1982 

were small because of reduced populatic 


size of prespawning adults. 


2 Some outflow and diversion data 

3 All types of parasites and host 


not available, 
reactions. 


89 









o 


Sexual Maturity. Spent females were significantly 
different than maturing females in having higher con¬ 
centrations of petrochemicals in the liver (parti¬ 
cularly toluene) and higher parasite burdens. Young 
prespawning females exhibited more alterations of egg 
maturation rate and resorption associated with petro¬ 
chemicals. Young prespawners were also more likely 
to have open or only partly healed cestode lesions. 

o Parasites. A significant proportion of adults 

(approximately 33 percent had scars from cestodes- 
induced lesions. These fish were in generally poorer 
condition than those without scars, and had higher 
levels of pollutants, particularly petrochemicals. 

Young adults and juveniles showed open lesions from 
these parasites (Figure 3). Many of the older fish 
had relatively large numbers of Anasakid roundworm 
larvae, sometimes in muscle. This worm can impact 
the health of man. 

4. Pollutants . Adult striped bass from the San Francisco Bay- 
Delta system contained relatively high levels of pol¬ 
lutants from several classes (Table 3. ranges; Whipple, 
et. al. in prep, contains all means and standard devia¬ 
tions). Some of these pollutants showed strong 
correlations with poor health and condition, parasite 
burdens and impaired reproduction. 

o Petrochemicals. There were significant levels of 

monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, including benzene, 
toluene, ethylbenzene and three isomers of xylene, in 
tissues of striped bass. There were also significant 
levels of alicyclic hexanes. All these components 
are relatively toxic to fish (Benville and Korn, 

1977; Benville et. al. 1985). In addition to the 
effects on the fish associated with these compounds 
in liver and ovaries, the muscle tissue appeared to 
differentially accumulate toluene which has been 
shown previously to cause the "tainting" or bad fla¬ 
vor in other species. Other data (Vassilvos, et. al . 
1982) show that there were also relatively high lev¬ 
els of polycyclic aromatics in adult striped bass. 

For example, levels of thiophenes in fish from the 
San Francisco Bay-Delta were higher than in fish from 
other areas. These compounds are carcinogenic. 

High levels of petrochemicals in the fish correlated 
strongly with deleterious effects measured, including 
egg resorption (Figure 4) and abnormal reproduction. 
The mean egg resorption by year, comparing locations, 
is shown in Figure 5. In 1982, sample size (7) was 


90 




0 
TJ 0) 

0 rH 

-P £ 0 
<H O 0 

0 r-H 0 

0 rH 

Q) o a) 

0 - ki 
0 fd 
woe 

•H -H 

-P 0 
0 o 0 
0 0 0 
•h m -h 
0 0 0 
0-0 0 
i - 1 H 

0 

0 0 * * 

0 > 0 0 
a 0 0 o 
O 0 0 0 

rH PH 
0 

• F* ^-i d 
0 0 0 0 
0 O 73 

0 |3 rH 0 
^0 0^ 
a. +-> 

Ti 0 0 
0 -P M 0 

P-I o 

■H O 

0 -P • tn 
-P 0 0 
0 tn O -H 
0 -H £ 
03 -H -P O 
0 -P O ,0 

0 o a.) 0 
0 0^ 

•H 0 0 0 
0 0 -rH 0 
0 I 0 
10 0 H O 
0 0 0 
K> - H 

• O 0 >i 
ro 0 r-H 

0 -P 0 
0 0 O O 
0 -H 0 
0 10 0 01 
Cd -p 

•H M-| >,-h 
0 0 0 3 : 


91 



Figure 4A. Eggs from ovaries of striped bass. 
Normal eggs in secondary to tertiary yolk stage. 


92 



Figure 4E. Abnormal eggs, in varying stages of 
resorption. This condition is associated with 
petrochemicals. 


93 



Figure 4C. Abnormal eggs, in late development stage, 
being resorbed. Note dark areas of melanin-containing 
melanomacrophages in intercellular areas. This 
condition is associated with DDT. 


94 



REPRODUCTION: PERCENT EGG RESORPTION 


30 

Percentage 
of Eggs 20 
Resorbed 

10 



I 


1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 
i-San Joaquin River- 1 

Location / Year 


1980 1982 

Coos Hudson 
River River 


Figure 5. Mean egg resorption in striped bass 
prespawning females by year (1978-1984) and at 
different locations. 


95 




too small for a representative assessment. An ex¬ 
ample of the proportion of egg resorption because of 
various factors, including petrochemicals, is shown 
in Figure 6. Reduced egg condition was particularly 
associated with high concentrations of ethylbenzene 
and 1, 2-dimethylchyclohexane. These components are 
also among the more toxic and persistent in tissues 
of the low-boiling point petrochemicals. 

High concentrations of benzene were associated with 
blood cell destruction, abnormal blood cell develop¬ 
ment and other blood parameters. There was also a 
correlation between the presence of lesion scars and 
petrochemical concentration, particularly toluene and 
ethylbenzene. 

Concentrations of monocyclic aromatics in the tissues 
of field fish correspond to levels reached in tissues 
of fish exposed in the laboratory to 50-100 ppb mono- 
cyclics (particularly benzene). The bioaccumulation 
was generally about ten times higher than the water 
concentrations (Whipple, et. al . 1981). 

o Chlorinated hydrocarbons. There were relatively high 
levels of PCBs, DDT, and its metabolites, and other 
chlorinated hydrocarbons, including toxaphene, in 
liver and gonads and fish from the San Francisco Bay- 
Delta estuary (Table 3). Concentrations of some 
chlorinated hydrocarbons were at levels resulting in 
deleterious effects in other fish (Jung, Moser, and 
Whipple, 1984). The presence of DDT in liver and 
gonads (not metabolites DDD and DDE) was associated 
with abnormal egg development and necrosis of eggs 
(Figure 4C). Delayed egg maturation rates (vitello¬ 
genesis) were associated with PCBs in ovaries. 

o Heavy metals. There were relatively high levels of 
zinc and copper and other metals in adult striped 
bass livers and gonads (Table 3). The concentration 
of zinc and other metals correlated with decreased 
body and liver condition in some fish. Cadmium, 
nickel, zinc, and copper also correlated with reduc¬ 
tions in egg viability in the 1981 San Joaquin River 
sample. High levels of other metals were found, 
particularly mercury, in some fish. 

o Pollutant interaction. Initial results show pol¬ 
lutants interacted in affecting the fish. In parti¬ 
cular, high levels of petroleum hydrocarbons inter¬ 
acted with chlorinated hydrocarbons to produce ef¬ 
fects on reproduction. Data also show that hydro¬ 
carbons and metals interact to produce deleterious 
effects on egg and liver condition. 


96 



Figure 6. Proportion of total variance in egg 
condition (egg resorption) accounted for by different 
factors. Derived from factor equations in factor 
analysis. Most fish collected in this year had high 
levels of monocyclic aromatics in the liver and gonads. 

EXAMPLE: San Joaquin River; 1978. N=59 females. 

+EGG RESORPTION = .35F3 = .42F6 = .54F11 = .42F13 = U 

U = Unidentified Variance; DMCH = 1,2,-dimethylcyclohexane 
EGG STG. = Egg Stage; EBZ = Ethylbenzene; CU = Copper; 

COL PAT = Color Pattern; TOL = Toluene. 


97 



Table 3.—Concentration ranges of selected pollutant classes from the San 
Francisco Bay-Delta estuary; data available to present. Tissue data from 
adult prespawning striped bass ( Morone saxatilis ). Tissue concentrations 
in ug/g (ppm) wet weight hydrocarbons ug/g (ppm) dry weight for metals. 

Data from this study and Vasillaros et al. (1982), Eaton (1975), and Girvin 
et al• (1978). ND = not detectable; NM = not measured. 


Concentration 

in water Concentration in tissues (ppm) 
(dissolved) 

Pollutant class_uer/L (ppb) Liver Gonads Muscle^ 

Petroleum hydrocarbons 


Total monocyclic aromatics 

1-200 

0.01-10 

0.01-10 ( 

).01-7.52 

Total alicyclic hexanes 

ND 

0.02-5.0 

0.02-10 

0 

Total polycyclic aromatics 

(All components) 

o 

—Whole fish composite 

10.0- 

Total naphthalenes (Dicyclics) ? 

—Whole fish composite 

0.009- 

Total sulfated thiophenes 

o 

—Whole fish composite 

6.0- 

Chlorinated hydrocarbons 

DDT 

ND 

0.09-0.12 

0.10-0.68 

NM 

COD 

ND 

0.10-0.98 

0.13-2.8 

NM 

DDE 

ND 

0.03-3.1 

0.10-12 

NM 

Toxaphene 

0.03-0.32 

o 

• 

0.20-2.0 

NM 

Total PCB's 

ND 

0.25-13 

0.81-13 ( 

).20-4.0 

Trace metals 

Cadmium 

0.08-0.20 

0.29-9.4 

0.08-0.71 

0.18-1.3 

Chromium 

ND 

0.61-3.3 

0.51-2.2 

0.31-2.2 

Copper 

1-4 

1.0-220 

1.0-35 

0.10-12 

Lead 

0.03-0.12 

0.09-0.37 

0.06-0.89 

0.11-0.62 

Mercury 

ND 

0.49-13 

0.03-0.96 

0.06-1.6 

Nickel 

1-6 

0.60-1.8 

0.37-2.1 

0.50-2.0 

Selenium 

o 

• 

3.2-21 

NM 

NM 

Zinc 

2-6 

7.0-250 

3.0-310 

1.0-66 


1 Muscle analyses with no skin attached. Mostly toluene in muscled 


98 









Pollutants most implicated in deleterious effects on 
fish are, in order: ethylbenzene, 1, 2-dimethylcyclo- 
hexane, benzene toluene; DDT, copper, zinc, cadmium, 
nickel, and mercury. However, other pollutants may 
be involved that we were unable to measure. For ex¬ 
ample, recent measurements show that there are rela¬ 
tively high levels of selenium in liver and gonads of 
striped bass. Several pollutants, particularly chlo¬ 
rinated hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatics, cadmium, 
and mercury were found at levels sufficiently high 
not only to affect the health of the fish but also to 
potentially affect human health. 

The relevant fact is that there are strong associa¬ 
tions of these pollutants with decreased condition, 
growth, reproduction, and possibly survival of 
striped bass. 

5. Laboratory experiments . Experiments performed in the 

laboratory showed that representative pollutants (benzene 
and zinc) produced effects similar to those observed in 
the field (Jung, Whipple, Moser, 1984; Whipple, et. al . ms 
in prep.). Laboratory exposures equivalent to high chron¬ 
ic water levels in the field resulted in tissue concen¬ 
trations similar to those in field fish (magnitude of 
concentration of benzene and/or other total MAH was ap¬ 
proximately 10X). The effects on condition of tissues and 
organs, and other parameters were also similar. The fol¬ 
lowing were some major results: 

Adults: 

o Benzene induced egg resorption in prespawning females 
similar to that in field fish. Fish with higher 
pollutant burdens when exposed to benzene were most 
seriously affected. 

Juveniles: 

o Uptake of benzene and zinc appeared to be antagonis¬ 
tic -- high concentrations of benzene in the liver 
were correlated with low concentrations of zinc. 

o Benzene appeared to accelerate and increase the 
inflammatory response to roundworm larvae. 

o Benzene was correlated with blood cell destruction 

followed by increased production of immature red and 
white blood cells. 

o Zinc was correlated with decreased liver condition 
(LSI). 


99 



Zinc was correlated with decreased levels of serum 
proteins hypothesized to be immunoglobulins. 

o Fish exposed to benzene or zinc had higher levels of 
protozoan gill parasites than controls. 

o The effects of benzene and zinc together resulted in 
greater effects on the fish than either pollutant 
alone, including the following: 

Inflammatory response to parasitic worms was 
accelerated. 

Blood cells and serum proteins were more 
deleteriously affected. 

Liver tissue was more deleteriously affected. 

6. Population Effects . Although influences other than 

toxic chemicals (e.g, Delta outflow, larval food supply 
and entrainment; Stevens et. al. 1985) also are involved 
in the decline of the striped bass fishery, the fol¬ 
lowing hypotheses were also supported by the study 
findings. 

o There has been a reduction in numbers of larvae to 
young-of-the-year juveniles. Laboratory studies 
showed that larvae accumulate high levels of toxic 
pollutants (e.g., benzene) with deleterious effects 
(Eldridge et. al . 1981). These studies should be 
corroborated in the field. We suggest that toxic 
pollutants and parasitic cestode lesions may also 
increase mortality of juveniles and subadults. 

o There has been a reduction in the number of 

spawning adults. The poorer condition of older 
adults is at least partially due to the combined 
effects of parasitism and pollutants. It is also 
likely that increased mortality of adults has 
occurred, leading to fewer older fish that normally 
have the highest fecundity. Ultimately, this will 
lead to decreased egg production by the population 
and decreased abundance of juveniles. According to 
Stevens et. al . (1985), this is probably an impor¬ 
tant cause of the decline in the striped bass popu¬ 
lation. 

o The reduction in the number of eggs (fecundity) per 
spawner, due to the combined effects of pollutants 
and parasitism, was at least 36-50 percent in 1978. 
This reduction was assessed from measurements of: 

- delayed rate of maturation (vitellogenesis) 


100 



partial egg resorption 

complete egg resorption in maturing ovary 
no ovarian maturation in sexually mature fish 
egg death 

- reduction in number of eggs (fecundity) 

Pollutants, therefore, can lead to additional decreases 
in the egg production of the population. Additional delayed 
mortality may have occurred in embryos and larvae after 
spawning, resulting in even further reduction in survival. 


o Multiple regression analyses were done with data 

collected for the years 1978 to 1984 (7 years) from 
San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers. Results showed 
that survival to young-of-the-year related to age 
distribution of spawning adults, outflow and diver¬ 
sion, petrochemicals and egg resorption. The best 
correlation was with egg resorption (Figure 7). 

The hierarchy of relationships is probably as fol¬ 
lows (Figure 8): Environmental factors such as 
lower outflow are associated with higher petrochemi¬ 
cal contmination; higher residues of petrochemicals 
interact with inherent factors in prespawning 
adults to affect condition and reproduction. 

Greater egg resorption occurs and subsequently 
there is higher larval mortality. Higher mortality 
of eggs and larvae results in lower abundance of 
juvenile striped bass. The important result, in 
terms of fisheries management, is that recruitment 
to the fishery is reduced. If successful, this 
method can lead to the forecasting of recruitment 
several years in advance. Our results so far, 
however, are for a short period (7 years) and need 
to be validated by continued monitoring before 
conclusions can be drawn. 


Conclusions 


The San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary has been modified in 
several ways since humans settled this area (Nichols et. al. 
1986). Among the most significant of these is the elimination 
of habitat for fish and other biota through human activities 
such as filling of wetlands and diversion of water for agricul¬ 
ture. Further degradation of this estuary due to increased 
diversion of water and increased disposal of toxic wastes is 
predicted. 


101 



LOGe YOY SUISUN 


36 - 


o 


o SJ=SAN JOAQUIN RIVER 
• SC=SACRAMENTO RIVER 


3.4- 

3.2- 

30- 


2 . 8 - 


2 . 6 - 


o 


2.4- 


0 


T-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 

LOGe ARCSINE % RESORPTION 


Figure 7. Correlation of yearly mean survival to young- 
of-the-year juveniles (YOY) with mean egg resorption in 
adult females of that spawning season. Data on YOY striped 
bass index from David Kohlhorst 

In YOY Suisun = 3.60 - .341 In Egg Resorption 

r = -. 869; Pc. 001 


102 






POPULATION LEVEL EFFECTS 



Figure 8. Population level effects. Determining 
the relationship of environmental factors (e.g. 
pollutants) on fish condition, reproduction and 
recruitment to the fishery. 


103 






















The striped bass population is a major component of the 
San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary, particularly in past years 
prior to its decline. It would be of interest to do more re¬ 
search on the relationship of the population dynamics of this 
species to the flow dynamics of the estuary, and to examine 
the striped bass in an ecosystem context. This would be of 
critical importance in making future decisions on water 
quality and the management of fisheries in the San Francisco 
Bay-Delta system. 

In conclusion, we believe that further investigation of 
sources and effects of pollutants on striped bass and other 
biota in the San Francisco Bay-Delta is warranted. We believe 
also that enough is known for managers and regulators to act 
now and that any activity reducing the input of these toxic 
pollutants into the estuary will be beneficial to the health 
and abundance of the striped bass population. 

Acknowledgements 

This research was supported by the National Marine 
Fisheries Service and by a contract from the former Office of 
Marine Pollution Assessment under the Marine Protection, 
Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-532; Title II, 
Section 202). Further cooperation and support was from the 
State of California Water Resources Control Board within the 
Cooperative Striped Bass Study, codirected by Marvin Jung, 
Consultant. We appreciate the advice, assistance, and 
cooperation of staff from the CDFG in Stockon, California, 
particularly Donald Stevens and David Kohlhorst. 

References 


Benville, Pete E., Jr. and Korn, Sid, 1977: The acute 

toxicity of six monocyclic aromatic crude oil components 
to striped bass ( Morone saxatilis) and bay shrimp 
( Crangon francoscorum ). Calif. Fish and Game 
63(4) :204-209. 

Benville, Pete E. Jr.; Whipple, Jeannette A.; and Eldridge, 
Maxwell B., 1985: Acute toxicity of seven alicyclic 
hexanes to striped bass Morone saxatilis and bay shrimp 
Crangon francoscorum . in seawater. Calif. Fish and Game 
71(3): 132-140. 

Eaton, Andrew, 1979: Observations on the geochemistry of 

soluble copper, iron, nickel, and zinc in the San Fran¬ 
cisco Bay estuary. Environ. Sci. and Tech. Res . 

13(4):425-431. 

Eldridge, Maxwell B.; Benville, Pete; and Whipple, Jeannette 

A., 1981: Physiologic responses of striped bass ( Morone 
saxatilis ) embryos and larvae to low sublethal concentra¬ 
tions of the aromatic hydrocarbons benzene. Proc. Gulf 
Caribb. Fish Inst . 33:52-68. 


104 



















Girvin, Donald C.; Hodgson, Alfred T.; Tatro, Mark E.; and 
Anaclerio, Roy N. Jr., 1978: Spatial and seasonal 
variations of silver, cadmium, copper, nickel, lead, and 
zinc in south San Francisco Bay waters during two 
consecutive drought years. Energy and Environ. Div., 
Lawrence-Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, 
Berkely, CA. Final Report UCID-8008. 

MacFarlane, R. Bruce and Whipple, Jeannette A., 1984: Striped 
Bass Health Index. In-House report submitted to Advi¬ 
sory Committee for Aquatic Habitat Program, State Water 
Resources Control Board. April, 1984. 

Moser, Mike? Love, Milton? and Sakanari, Judy A., 1984: 

Common parasites of California fish. Calif. Pep. Fish 
and Game . 20 p. 

Moser, Mike? Sakanari, Judy A.? Wellings, Sefton? and 

Lindstrom, Kris, 1984: Incompatibility between San 
Francisco striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum), and 
the metacestode, Lacistrohvnchus tenuis (Beneden 1858). 

J. Fish Pis . 7:397-400. 

Moser, Mike? Sakanari, Judy A.? Reilly, Carol A.? and Whipple, 
Jeannette, 1985: Prevalence, intensity, longevity, and 
persistence of Anasakis sp. larvae and Lacistorhvnchus 
tenuis metacestodes in San Francisco striped bass. NOAA 
Tech. Rpt. NMFS 29: 4 p. 

Nichols, Frederick H.? Cloern, James E.? Luoma, Samuel N.? and 
Peterson, David., 1986: The modification of an estuary. 
Science . 231:567-573. 

Nie, Norman H.? Hull, Hadlai? Jenkins, Jean G? Steinbrenner, 
Karin? and Bent, Dale H., 1975: SPSS: Statistical 
Package for the Social Sciences , second edition. 
McGraw-Hill, N.Y. 675 p. 

Stevens, Donald E.? Kohlhorst, David W.? Miller, Lee W.? and 
Kelly, D.W., 1985: The decline of striped bass in the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary, California. Trans. Am. 
Fish. Soc . 114:12-30. 

Vassilaros, D.L.? Eastwood,D.A.? West,W.R.? Booth, G.M.? and 

M.L. Lee, 1982: Determination and bioconcentration of 
polycyclic aromatic sulfur in heterocycles in aquatic 
biota. In M. Cooke, A.J. Dennis, G.L. Fisher (editors). 
Sixth international symposium for polynuclear aromatic 
hydrocarbons: Physical and biological chemistry, p. 
845-857. Battelle Press, Columbus, Ohio. 


105 

















Whipple, Jeannette A.; Eldridge, Maxwell B.; Benville, Pete, 

Jr., 1981: An ecological perspective of the effects of 
monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons on fishes. In F.J. 

Vernberg (editors), Biological Monitoring of Marine 
Pollutants , p. 483-551. Academic Press, N.Y. 

Whipple, Jeannette A. 1982: The impact of estuarine degrada¬ 
tion and chronic pollution on populations of anadromous 
striped bass (Morone saxatilis) in San Francisco Bay- 
Delta, California. Annual research report submitted to 
NOAA, OMPA. May 15, 1982. 

Whipple, Jeannette A. 1984: The impact of estuarine degrada¬ 
tion and chronic pollution on populations of anadromous 
striped bass ( Morone saxatilis ) in San Francisco Bay- 
Delta, California. A summary for managers and regula¬ 
tors. NOAA, NMFS, SWFC Admin. Rpt. T-84-01, 41 p. 

Whipple, Jeannette A.; Bowers, Michael; Jarvis, Brian; and 
Moreland, Sharon, 1983: Report on the condition and 
health of May 1982 sample of Hudson River adult, pre¬ 
spawning striped bass. In-house report, NMFS, Tiburon 
Laboratory. 23 p. (Manuscript in preparation for publica¬ 
tion) . 

Whipple, Jeannette A.; Jung, Marvin; MacFarlane, R. Bruce; and 
Fischer, Rahel, 1984: Histopathological manual for 
monitoring health of striped bass in relation to pol¬ 
lutant burdens. Tech. Mem. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-46, 81 p. 

Cooperative Striped Bass Study (COBS) Reports: 

Jung, Marvin and Bowes, Gerald, 1980: First progress report 
on the Cooperative Striped Bass Study (COBS). Calif. 

State Water Resour. Control Board. Sacramento, CA., 64 p. 

Jung, Marvin, Whipple, Jeannette A., and Moser, L. Michael, 

1984: Summary report of the Cooperative Striped Bass Study 

(COSBS). A study of the effects of pollutants on the San 
Francisco Bay-Delta striped bass fishery. Draft summary 
report submitted to the California State Water Resources 
Control Board. 

Whipple, Jeannette A. and Jung, Marvin, 1981: Cooperative 

Striped Bass Study (COBS). Appendix I: Procedures for 
histopathological examinations, autopsies and subsampling 
of striped bass. Calif. State Water Resour. Control Board, 
Sacramento, CA., 46 p. 

Whipple, Jeannette A.; Crosby, Donald G.; and Jung, Marvin, 

1983: Third progress report: Cooperative Striped Bass 

Study (COBS). Calif. State Water Resour. Control Board, 
Sacramento, CA., 208 p. 


106 








SUBLETHAL EFFECTS OF CONTAMINANTS ON THE METABOLISM OF 

METALS AND ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN THE BAY MUSSEL 


Florence L. Harrison and John P. Knezovich 
Environmental Sciences Division 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 
Livermore, CA 94550 


Abstract 


Biochemical mechanisms for the detoxification of metals and 
organic compounds in the bay mussel Mvtilus edulis were 
investigated. Mussels exposed to increased levels of copper in 
the laboratory were shown to have proteins that bind and thereby 
detoxify some metals. Chronic exposure to metals can cause 
saturation of the detoxification system, however, and result in 
metal interaction with sensitive enzymes and proteins. Accord¬ 
ingly, mussels from contaminated ecosystems (South San Francisco 
Bay and near municipal outfalls in the Southern California 
Bight) were shown to have increased levels of metals in meta¬ 
bolic pools as compared to mussels from a relatively pristine 
ecosystem (Tomales Bay). 

The ability of mussels to metabolize a trace organic 
contaminant (o-toluidine) was defined. Mussels were shown to 
metabolically activate this compound to a mutagenic form and 
also to detoxify it via basal metabolic pathways. Mussels from 
a contaminated site in San Francisco Bay demonstrated a dimin¬ 
ished ability to handle this contaminant as evidenced by a 
overall reduction in metabolic rate. Continuing research on 
mechanisms of biochemical adaptation will provide a better 
understanding of the adaptive capabilities of mussels from 
pristine and contaminated ecosystem. 

Introduction 


Organisms present in aquatic environments may be exposed 
continually to low concentrations of a variety of metals and 
organic compounds from anthropogenic sources. Concentrations of 
these contaminants in the environment are generally below those 
that cause mortality, but they may be sufficiently high to af¬ 
fect adversely an organism's growth rate, reproductive success, 
or ability to compete with other species in the ecosystem. 
Organisms may respond to such sublethal stress through the 
evolution of reproductive, behavorial, and physiological strate¬ 
gies that confer biological resilience. The goal of our re¬ 
search is to understand the limits of adaptation of basic bio¬ 
chemical processes that confer resilience to aquatic organisms. 
Our experiments are designed to obtain results that provide a 
better understanding of the basic mechanisms used by aquatic 
animals to handle increased quantities of trace metals and 
organic compounds in the environment. 


107 








We focus on detoxification and biotransformation processes and 
propose to develop methodologies that can be used to identify 
aquatic ecosystems at risk, to evaluate ecosystem contaminant 
capacity, and to monitor the impact of contaminants from waste 
sites or effluent discharges. 

Let us consider briefly changes in phsiological response 
that fishes and invertebrates may undergo in response to 
increases in environmental stress. These responses may be 
divided into four phases: normal adjustment, which is 
controlled by homeostatic processes; compensation, which is 
maintained without significant cost to the individual; 
breakdown, which occurs at the limit of compensatory processes; 
and finally failure, which is characterized by irreversible 
changes that result in death of the individual (Figure 1). Most 
of the standards and criteria that have been set were based on 
single species tests that used mortality as the endpoint. 

Because concentrations that cause mortality are too high to 
protect populations, standards and criteria were set not from 
these values, but from LC50 values that were multipled by an 
application factor considered to provide the degree of conser¬ 
vatism required. However, what may be more relevant for the 
maintenance of healthy populations in aquatic ecosystems is the 
setting of criteria and standards that are based on knowledge of 
when the limits of compensatory processes are being approached. 
This is critical because when these limits are exceeded, adverse 
effects ensue. 

The organism we chose to study was the bay mussel Mvtilus 
edulis. This species was selected because it appears to have 
evolved compensatory (adaptive) strategies that have resulted in 
the distribution of mussels throughout the world in bays and 
estuarine that have wide fluctuations in environmental condi¬ 
tions. Furthermore, there is an extensive data base on con¬ 
taminant levels in populations from pristine and polluted eco¬ 
systems (Goldberg et. al . 1978), and studies have been performed 
to characterize its morphology (White, 1937) and its physio¬ 
logical and reproductive processes (Bayne et. al . 1976). 

Metal Metabolism 


Let us consider now metal metabolism in aquatic animals. It 
has been well established that many aquatic animals accumulate 
significant metal burdens from metal-contaminated ecosystems. 
Although the biochemical processes associated with metal toxi¬ 
city have not been completely identified, specific effects have 
been demonstrated. Evidence is available indicating that the 
site of toxic action may be enzymes. However, the toxic effects 
on enzymes may be mitigated by the organism's ability to detoxi¬ 
fy metals and eliminate them. It is apparent, then, that an 
understanding of these toxification and detoxification processes 
is required. 


108 






Normal adjustment Compensation Breakdown Failure 


► 


Figure 1. Changes in the physiological responses of aquatic animals to 
increased levels of stress in aquatic ecosystems. Modified from Hatch (1962). 


109 










Toxification may result from alterations in enzyme acti¬ 
vity. These alterations may result when excesses of essential 
metals or nonessential metals bind to enzymes. Metalloenzymes 
may be rendered nonfunctional by confirmational changes brought 
about by binding with metals possessing properties different 
from the metals that are required for optimal activity of the 
metalloenzymes. Also, nonfunction may be due to induction of 
conformational changes so that substrate molecules no longer fit 
into binding sites. Alternatively, nonfunction could result 
from splitting of enzymes into subunits, which could interfere 
with feedback control mechanisms. Because any of these reac¬ 
tions could result in impaired metabolic activity, it is not 
unexpected that adverse effects would occur. 

Detoxification mechanisms that have been proposed for metals 
include binding to metallothioneins (MT), which are proteins 
having a high affinity for some metals. This mechanism appears 
to be ubiquitous among organisms; these proteins have been de¬ 
scribed in organisms throughout the animal kingdom (Kagi and 
Nordberg, 1979). They were first characterized in mammals and 
now have been found to have a similar function in fishes, inver¬ 
tebrates, and plants. MT represent a family of inducible, low- 
molecular-weight (LMW), intracellular, cytoplasmic proteins that 
normally bind seven to ten atoms of metals per molecule. These 
proteins have been isolated from kidneys and livers of both 
vertebrates and invertebrates. MT possess a number of unique 
structural and functional characteristics. They contain 2 5 to 
35 percent cysteninyl residues and lack histidinyl and aromatic 
amino acid residues. All cysteinyl-SH groups are involved in 
complexation of metal ions and do not form either intra- or 
intermolecular disulfide bonds. The mode of distribution of 
cysteinyl residues within the amino acid sequence is highly 
conserved among isoforms of the protein from the same organisms, 
as well as those isolated from taxonomically distinct organ¬ 
isms. Recently, considerable information has become available 
on the mode of action and genetic control of MT. 

The induction of the synthesis of MT has been demonstrated 
in aquatic animals exposed to metals. The induction of MT is a 
very significant process, not only because it appears to be im¬ 
portant in detoxification, but also because it can confer in¬ 
creased tolerance to organisms. For some species, this toler¬ 
ance results in increased survival of aquatic organisms and 
their communications; this phenomenon is of significance to 
those managing aquatic resources. 

On the west coast, research on MT in fishes and inverte¬ 
brates has been performed by Dr. Kenneth Jenkins and coworkers 
at California State University at Long Beach (Jenkins et. al. 
1984), Dr. David Brown and coworkers at SCHWRPP (Brown et^ al. 
1984), Dr. Guri Roesijadi and coworkers at Pacific Northwest 
Laboratory at Sequim (Roesijadi et. al. 1982, and by our group 
at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (Harrison et al. 1983). 


110 


Our investigations of metal metabolism in mussels involved 
studies of both laboratory and field populations. Standard 
biochemical methods were used to separate metal-binding 
proteins. The mussel tissue that was used was the digestive 
gland, which is known to concentrate metals and is homologous to 
the liver of mammals. Digestive glands from 25 mussels were 
pooled, homogenized, centrifuged at 100,000 x g, and then an 
aliquot of the supernatant fluid was applied to a gel permeation 
chromatography column. The column effluent was monitored for 
absorbance in the UV region and collected in a fraction 
collector. Sample fractions were analyzed for each metal. Two 
metal peaks are generally found. The first peak represents 
metals associated with high-molecular-weight (HMW) proteins and 
the second peak with low-molecular-weight (LMW) proteins. The 
HMW proteins include metalloenzymes that are necessary for 
normal metabolic activities and are considered to be the sites 
of toxic action of metals; the LMW proteins include metallothio- 
neins that are considered to be the sites of detoxification. 

The changes in the amounts of copper associated with these 
two sizes of proteins are shown for digestive glands of mussels 
that had been exposed for three weeks to 25, 50, and 75 pg Cu/L 
(Figure 2). The quantities of copper associated with both the 
LMW and HMW proteins were greater in those exposed to copper. 
However, whereas the amount in the HMW proteins increased with 
exposure concentration, that associated with the LMW proteins 
was highest in those that had been exposed to 50 ug Cu/L. These 
results indicate that exposure to 75 pg Cu/L for three weeks was 
not well tolerated. This was indicated also from the mortality 
data that showed a large percentage of mortality in the group 
exposed to 75 pg Cu/L. Although the mortality was correlated 
with the amount of Cu associated with the HMW peak (Figure 3), 
it does not establish a cause-effect relationship. 

A second experiment in which mussels were exposed to 25 ug 
Cu/L for 12 weeks was performed. The quantities of metals as¬ 
sociated with the HMW and LMW proteins was quantified; the a- 
mount associated with the HMW proteins continued to increase 
with time whereas that associated with the LMW proteins MT ap¬ 
peared to plateau (Figure 4). The presence of a plateau indi¬ 
cates that the quantities of MT that are produced are limited, 
which, in turn, implies that the detoxification provided by this 
process is also limited. 

It has been established that pre-exposure to low concen¬ 
trations of metals may result in the induction in the synthesis 
of MT; this phenomenon may account for the large increase be¬ 
tween 3- and 6-week samples in the amount of copper associated 
with LMW proteins. It has also been established that increased 
concentrations of MT results in increased tolerance to exposure 
to additional metals. In our experiments, the possibility of 
increased tolerance to copper was not examined. 


Ill 


Copper (1x10* /nmoles/g wet weight) 



Figure 2. Copper profiles constructed from gel permeation 
chromatography from 100,000 x g supernatant fluid of homogenized 
digestive glands from 25 mussels. HMW designates high-molecular- 
weight protein fraction containing metalloenzymes; LMW designates 
low-molecular-weight protein fraction containing metallothionein. 
The numbers adjacent to the curves indicated the concentrations 
of copper to which the mussels were exposed. 


112 









- 37.5 



x 


a 

CL 

O 

o 


200 - 


5 150 - 


o 

E 

a 


100 - 


- 12.5 


25 50 

Copper (jug L' 1 ) 


Figure 3. Percent mortality after 21-day exposure to copper 
compared to the concentration of copper in the high-molecular- 
weight protein fraction. 


113 


Mortality (%) 











Copper (1x10 /xmoles/g wet weight) 



Figure 4. Changes in the quantities of copper in the high 
molecular-weight (HMW) and low-molecular-weight. (L M W) Protein 
fractions in the supernatant fluid from homogenized digesti 
glands from 25 mussels that had been exposed to 25 pq Cu/t 


114 




A third experiment was performed to determined the effect of 
exposure to copper for longer periods of time than were used in 
the first two experiments. Mussels wee exposed to 10 and 25 ug 
Cu/L for 21 weeks. In those that were exposed to 25 ug Cu/L, 
there were large increases in the quantities of copper associ¬ 
ated with both the HMW and LMW proteins, whereas in those 
exposed to 10 ug Cu/L, there were large increases only in the 
LMW proteins (Figure 5). These results indicate that detoxifi¬ 
cation provided by the MT found in the LMW protein was adequate 
to prevent built-up of copper in the HMW protein fraction that 
contains enzymes critical for normal metabolism. 

In field studies we investigated the kinds and quantities of 
metals associated with these same proteins in populations from a 
pristine environment (Tomales Bay, CA) and in those from a con¬ 
taminated environment (South San Francisco Bay). In addition, 
we participated in a mussel-transplant study with Dr. John 
Martin (California Department of Fish and Game); bagged mussels 
from Tomales Bay were distributed in an array near a municipal 
outfall in the Southern California Bight and sampled sequential¬ 
ly with time. 

Field populations of mussels from the two sites were found 
to differ in the distribution of metals between the LMW and HMW 
metalloproteins (Table 1). It is apparent that the South San 
Francisco Bay mussel were contaminated highly with copper and 
cadmium. In mussels transplanted from Tomales Bay to the White 
Point outfall in the Southern California Bight, the concentra¬ 
tions of metals associated with the LMW and HMW proteins in¬ 
creased significantly after 1- and 3-month exposure to the 
effluent (Table 2). Copper, cadmium, and zinc were rapidly 
accumulated in the LMW protein fraction containing the MT, and 
some displacement of the essential metal, Zn, may have occurred. 
However, interpretation of the results was confounded because no 
measurements of the levels of MT were made. We currently have a 
methodology for quantifying MT, and in our future transplanta¬ 
tion studies, we will follow both the concentration of MT and 
the metals associated with both LMW and HMW metalloproteins. 
Results from these kinds of experiments will provide a better 
understanding of metal metabolism and adaptive capabilities of 
mussels from pristine and metal-contaminated ecosystems. 

Organic Compound Metabolism 

Marine bivalve molluscs efficiently concentrate organic 
chemicals present in the water. Whether an organism will be 
harmed by accumulated contaminants is determined largely by its 
ability to transform them into more water-soluble (detoxified) 
forms. Some metabolic transformations, however, result in the 
production of activated compounds that are more toxic than the 
original contaminants. 


115 





Figure 5. Changes in the quantitites of copper in the high- 
molecular-weight (HMW) and low-molecular-weight (LMW) protein 
fractions in the supernatant fluid from homogenized digestive 
glands from 25 mussels that had been exposed to either 10 or 
25 jig Cu/L. 


116 




Table 1. Concentrations of metals in the high-molecular-weight 
(HMW) and low low-molecular-weight (LMW) (1 x 10” 4 umoles /g 
wet weight) protein fractions in the supernatant fluid from 
homogenized digestive glands from 25 mussels from Tomales Bay 
and South San Francisco Bay. 



TOMALES 

BAY 

SOUTH SAN 

FRANCISCO BAY 

HMW 

LMW 

HMW 

LMW 

Zinc 

330 

770 

460 

1320 

Copper 

10 

330 

480 

3600 

Cadimum 

ne£ 

ND 

140 

1600 

Total 

340 

1100 

1080 

6520 


a ND, none detected 


117 











Table 2. Concentrations of metals in the high-molecular-weight 
(HMW) and low low-molecular-weight (LMW) (1 x 10 4 umoles /g 
wet weight) protein fractions in the supernatant fluid from 
homogenized digestive glands from mussels that were transplanted 
to the White Point outfall in the Southern California Bight. 

The first sampling was taken after one month and the second 
after three months. Each sampling included 25 mussels. 


SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BIGHT 


SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2 



HMW 

LMW 

HMW 

LMW 

Zinc 

1600 

2000 

700 

1600 

Copper 

400 

1700 

550 

3500 

Cadmium 

80 

130 

430 

540 

Total 

2080 

3830 

1680 

5640 


118 











Our studies are concerned particularly with energy-related 
organic contaminants that are potentially mutagenic or carcino¬ 
genic. Many such compounds are present in the water-soluble 
fraction of fuel oils and are rapidly accumulated by aquatic 
organisms. 

Aromatic amines represent a class of organic contaminants 
that are present in a variety of industrial and energy-related 
wastes. The biological hazard posed by these compounds is 
largely determined by their biotransformation; that is a 
specific metabolic reaction (N-hydroxylation) is required before 
they elicit mutagenic or carcinogenic effects. Unfortunately, 
little is known about the ability of aquatic organisms to 
metabolize these contaminants. In our studies we have developed 
experimental protocols that can be used to assess the in vivo 
metabolic processing of these and other organic contaminants by 
marine invertebrates. Such basic information is needed because 
our knowledge of chemical metabolism has been based largely on 
studies of vertebrate organisms and may not directly apply to 
invertebrate species. With increased understanding of biotrans¬ 
formation in marine mussels, we will be better able to predict 
the effects of organic contaminants found in contaminated 
ecosystems. 

For our experiments we chose to study the metabolic trans¬ 
formation of a model aromatic amine (o-toluidine) whose struc¬ 
ture is representative of a broad class of potentially mutagenic 
contaminants. The mussels that we used in our initial experi¬ 
ments were from Tomales Bay. These mussels rapidly accumulated 
o-toluidine and eliminated metabolites that were significantly 
different from those produced by vertebrate organisms (Figure 
1). Mussels and vertebrate organisms form different metabolites 
because they have different detoxification mechanisms. In addi¬ 
tion to producing mutagenically activated (nitrogen-oxidized) 
metabolities, the mussels were able to add a single carbon atom 
to the nitrogen atom and form a novel detoxification product, 
n-formyl-o-toluidine. This nitrogen metabolizing pathway repre¬ 
sents a significant departure from the two-carbon addition (ace¬ 
tylation) that is usually observed in vertebrate of this common 
detoxification pathway. The common carbon-oxidizing metabolic 
pathways that we expect to occur in mammals were not found in 
the mussels? we did verify our experimental techniques by 
isolating these metabolites from a rat injected with o-toluidine 
(Figure 6). 

The pathways available to mussels for the metabolism of 
aromatic amines consist of reactions that the organisms normally 
utilize for the metabolism of amino acids, fatty acids, and 
proteins. Any change in the organism's ability to metabolize a 
foreign compound (i.e., o-toluidine) should therefore be 
indicative of its overall physiological state. We investigated 
this hypothesis by measuring the metabolic capabilities of 


119 



MOLLUSCS 


N = 0 



/ 



Figure 6. The biotransformation of a model aromatic amine 
(o-toluidine) by a marine mollusc (bay mussel), marine flat¬ 
fish (starry flounder), and Sprague-Dawley rat. The nitrogen- 
oxidizing capability of mussels is significant in as much as 
all mutagenic and carcinogenic aromatic amines require metabolic 
activation via this pathway. That is, the aromatic amines 
themselves are not harmful but their nitrogen-oxidized metabolites 
are capable of causing damage to biomolecules. 


120 







mussels taken from a site of known contamination in San 
Francisco Bay. Mussels were collected from a site at Redwood 
City where the California Department of Fish and Game has 
documented their bioconcentration of metals, synthetic organic 
chemicals, and petroleum hydrocarbons (Stephenson et. al. 

1982). In our comparative study (Table 3) we found that the 
total extent of o-toluidine metabolism in mussels from South San 
Francisco Bay was significantly less than mussels from Tomales 
Bay (Knezovich and Crosby, 1985). These results are in agree¬ 
ment with the findings of Martin et. al . (1984) who reported a 
diminished physiological condition, as evidenced by a reduced 
scope for growth, in mussels taken from this site. 

We are currently using our understanding of aromatic amine 
metabolism to better understand the effects of contaminant- 
induced stress. Mussels transplanted from Tomales Bay are being 
monitored for changes in their abilities to metabolize both 
metallic and organic contaminants. The results of this study 
will help us to define limits of physiological adaptation so 
that realistic evaluations of impacted populations can be made. 


Acknowledgements 

This work is supported by the Ecological Research Division 
of the U.S. Department of Energy; Office of Health and Environ¬ 
mental Research. Work is performed under the auspices of the 
U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Lab¬ 
oratory under Contract W-7405-Eng-48. 


References 


Bayne, B.L., ed., 1976: Marine Mussels: Their Ecology and 
Physiology . Cambridge University Press, London. 

Brown, D.A.; S.M. Bay; J.F. Alfafara; G.P. Hershelman; and K.D. 
Rosenthal, 1984: Detoxification/toxification of cadmium in 
scorpionfish f Scoroaenaguttata ): acute exposure. Aguatic 
Toxicol. 5:93-107. 


Goldberg, E.D.; V.T. Bowen, J.W.; Farrington, G. Harvey; J.H. 
Martin; P.L. Parker; R.W. Risenbrough; W. Robertson; E. 
Schneider; and E. Gamble, 1978: The mussel watch. Environ . 
Conserv. 5:1-25. 


Harrington, F.L.; J.R. Lam; and R. Berger, 1983: Sublethal 

responses of Mvtilus edulis to increased dissolved copper. 
The Science of the Total Environment . 28:141-158. 

Hatch, T, 1962: Changing objectives in occupational health. Am. 
Ind. Hyg. Assoc. 23:1-7. 


121 
















Table 3. The comparative metabolism of o-toluidine by Mytilus edulis 
from pristine (Tomales Bay) and contaminated ecosystems (San Francisco 
Bay) . 


Metabolites produced 

l in 8 hr. 

(pmole/mg dry wt.) 

Metabolites 

Tomales 

San Francisco 

N-Hydroxy-o-toluidine 

2.4(0.1) 

NB 

2-Nitrosotoluene 

22.2(14.2) 

9.5 ( 2.7 ) 

N-Methyl-o-toluidine 

29.3(16.0) 

9.3 (3.9) 

N-Formyl-o-toluidine 

27.9(13.8) 

9.7 (1.6 ) 

Sum of pathways 

81.8(44.2) 

28.5(6.6) 


ND, none detected 

Standard deviation in parentheses. 


122 







Jenkins, K.D.; B.M. Sanders; and W.G. Sunda, 1983: Metal regu¬ 
lation and toxicity in aquatic organisms. In T. Singer, T. 
Mansour and R. Ondarza, eds., Mechanisms of Drug Action . 
Academic Press, New York, p. 277. 

Kagi, J.H.R. and M. Nordberg, 1979: Metallothionein: 

Proceedings of the First International Meeting on Metallo - 

thionein and Other Low-Molecular-Weight Binding Proteins . 

Birkhauser Verlag, Boston, pp. 378. 

Knezovich, J.P. and D.G. Crosby, 1985: Fate and metabolism of; 
o-toluidine in the marine molluscs Mvtilus edulis and 
Crassostrea gigas . Environ. Tox. Chem. 4:435-446. 

Martin, M., G.; Ichikawa, J.; Goetzl, M. De Reyes; and M.D. 

Stephenson, 1984: Relationship between physiological and 
trace toxic substances in the bay mussel, Mvtilus edulis . 
from San Francisco Bay, California. Mar. Environ. Res . 11: 
91-110. 

Roesijadi, G.; A.S. Drum; J.M. Thomas; and G.W. Fellingham, 

1982: Enhanced mercury tolerance in marine mussels and 

relationship to low-molecular-weight, mercury-binding 
proteins. Mar. Pollut. Bull . 13:250-253. 

Stephenson, M.D.; S.L. Coale; M. Martin; D. Smith; E. Armbrust; 

E. Faurot; B. Allen; L. Cutter; G. Ichikawa; J. Goetzl; and 
J.H. Martin, 1982: California state mussel watch 1980-81. 
Trace metals and synthetic organic compounds in mussels from 
California's coast, bays and estuaries. State Water Re¬ 
sources Control Board, Water Quality Monitoring Report 81-11 
TS. Sacramento, CA, pp. 1-72. 

White, K.M., 1937: Mvtilus . Mem. Liverpool Mar. Biol. Comm . 31. 


123 










































































SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION AND MANAGEMENT POLICY 

FOR THE DELTA-SAN FRANCISCO BAY ECOSYSTEM 


Michael J. Herz and Michael A. Rozengurt 
Paul F. Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies 
San Francisco State University 


Abstract 


Despite the many attempts to create a useable data base with 
which to develop management policies for the Delta-Bay ecosys¬ 
tem, there is currently no agreement among scientists, resource 
managers, dischargers, and the public on a decision-making 
process that will lead to effective management. This paper 
proposes a procedure for developing management goals, scientific 
questions, research programs, conclusions, and recommendations 
leading to solutions for major estuarine problems based upon the 
systems analysis approach. The approach is illustrated with a 
number of systems block diagram examples. 

Thus far in this seminar presentation, there has been much 
discussion about science but little direct mention of management 
of the resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. However, 
it is important to realize that these earlier presentations have 
been about resource management because the data that have been 
presented -- the actual parts per million of pollutants in 
striped bass and the number of million acre feet of freshwater 
flowing into San Francisoc Bay from the Delta and rivers (after 
diverisons) — are all by-products of management decisions. 

They are measurements of the effectiveness of the management 
process. 

In fact, most of us believe that the status of the Delta and 
Bay and their natural resources has been determined to a great 
extent by prior management decisions. The problem is that we 
can't prove it. If we could show that the decline in freshwater 
inflow to the Delta and Bay or level of pollutants in the water 
caused the radical decline in striped bass, it would be 
relatively easy to convince resource managers that policies must 
be changed. The best that we can do is to find significant 
correlations (associations) between several of those factors 
(e.g., Rozengurt, Josselyn and Herz, this volume). Convincing 
resource managers that the findings the sufficient to warrant 
policy changes requires our developing the most powerful 
analytical techniques and the best scientific information and 
communicating it as clearly and concisely as possible in order 
to assist them with their decision-making. 


125 





When one works in the arena of policy and management 
decision-making, it becomes evident very quickly that scientists 
and managers view the world, and each other, quite differently. 
Managers often see scientists as intent on collecting unlimited 
quantities of irrelevant data over infinite time periods, and as 
not wanting to state conclusions without significant qualifying 
language. Perhaps it is this quality that once led Senator 
Proxmire to lament that he wanted more one-armed scientists, 
ones who would not say, "But on the other hand." 

On the other hand, scientists view managers (and politi¬ 
cians) as not understanding the need for large data bases col¬ 
lected under standardized conditions over long periods of time 
before conclusions can be reached with any degree of certainty. 
They judge the manager's quick decisions, based on what they 
consider insufficient information to be arrogant guesses, or 
worse, purse political expediency. 

The purpose of this paper is to show that each set of 
players needs to learn from the other, and that there do exist 
procedures for maximizing the degree to which decision-making, 
policy development and resource management can utilize technical 
information. 

This combination of circumstances surrounding the status of 
ecological information on the River-Delta-Bay-Ocean ecosystem 
indicates that we have serious problems regarding the adequacy 
of information on the resources that we are trying to manage. 

It also indicates that there does not exist an agreed-upon set 
of management goals for this, the largest estuary on the Pacific 
coast. Despite the over $3 billion spent on improving Bay water 
quality since the passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972, and 
despite the presence of over 75 agencies, academic institutions, 
and non-profit organizations concerned with the Bay and environ¬ 
mental issues, we have yet to develop a system which established 
widely accepted management goals. One Bay scientist expressed 
his concern over this problem as follows (Conomos, 1977): 

In response to environmental concerns during the past few 
decades, legislative committee have agreed that this estu¬ 
arine system should be protected against further indiscrim¬ 
inate and unrestrained exploitation. These committees and 
subsequent Federal and state legislation have mandated that 
sound plans for long-term intelligent and rational manage¬ 
ment of this valuable resource be formulated and imple¬ 
mented. There is, unfortunately, little scientific data on 
which to base these plans. Our knowledge of the complex 
physical, chemical, biological, and sedimentological estu¬ 
arine processes is relatively primitive. This is surpris¬ 
ing, considering the importance and irreplaceable nature of 
the system, the magnitude and cost of the public works al¬ 
ready built or in the planning stages, and the demands and 
standards imposed by environmental and regulatory agencies. 


126 



On the other hand, there is the view expressed by an in¬ 
dustry managers that although you don't have all of the informa¬ 
tion that you need to make the best management decisions, you 
must 


.-9° ahead and start making some wild guesses based on 

the information you have. Make your best possible esti¬ 
mates, because if you don't make those estimates, the mana¬ 
gers and the decision-makers are going to ignore you and go 
ahead and decide anyway, in the absence of any data (Adams, 
1982). 

So the question becomes, how do we chart a course through 
these troubled waters to find agreement? From the perspective 
to those concerned with the role of scientific information in 
the decision-making and management processes, we should begin by 
developing a set of management goals which are agreed to by 
managers, scientists, politicians, and the public. From this 
set of goals, it should then be possible to devise scientific 
questions which become the basis for a research program designed 
to produce information and recommendations that support the 
management goals or lead to their modification to better meet 
the environmental needs of this estuarine ecosystem. Schemati¬ 
cally, the approach is as follows: 

RECOMMENDATIONS <-r 

i 

MANAGEMENT GOALS 

1 

SCIENTIFIC QUESTIONS 

i 

RESEARCH PROGRAM DESIGN 

i 

DATA 

i 

CONCLUSIONS-‘ 

From the earlier discussion, it is obvious that neither the 
development of the management goals nor the design of the 
research program should become the exclusive domain of either 
scientists or managers. Rather, a Management Policy Committee 
should be created which has representation from both groups as 
well as from relevant industries and the public. Since research 
design requires specialized technical knowledge, a Technical 
Advisory Committee should be formed which consists of a multidis¬ 
ciplinary set of scientists from management agencies (Federal, 
state, and regional), research institutions, industry, and 
public oragnizations. Both of these committees should have 
representation from each of the categories of Bay Area interest 
groups: 


127 









San Francisco Bay Interest Groups 


Regulatory Agencies 

Environmental Protection Agency 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
Bureau of Reclamation 
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 
CA Dept, of Water Resources 
CA Dept, of Fish and Game 
Studies 

State Water Resources Control 
Board 

Regional Water Quality Control 
Bds. (S.F. Bay and Central 
Regions) 

Bay Conservation & Development 
Commission 

Non-Profit Organizations 

Committee for Water Policy 
Consensus 

Citizens for a Better Environ¬ 
ment 

Environmental Defense Fund Bay 
Institute 
Oceanic Society 
Save San Francisco Assn. 

Bay Wetlands Coalition 

Audubon Society 

Natural Resources Defense Fund 


Research Organizations 

Uni. of California Berkeley 
Sanitary Engineering Research 
Lab 

Lawrence Livermore Laboratory 
San Francisco State Univ. 
Tiburon Ctr. for Envir. 

U.S. Geological Survey 
National Oceanic and Atmos¬ 
pheric Administration 
Aguatic Habitat Institute 


Dischargers 

Bay Area Dischargers Assn. 

Bay Area League of Industrial 
Associations 


While the management structure is important, the future of 
the Delta and San Francisco Bay will be determined by whether or 
not solutions are developed for its problems, many of which have 
already been identified: 

o Decreases in freshwater inflow have resulted in major 

reductions in flushing activity (increases in renewal time) 
and reductions in fish stocks to all-time lows (Rozengurt, 
Josselyn, and Herz, this volume). 

o Pollutant loads in some species of fish and wildlife are so 
high that warnings have been issued to protect public 
health; these loads may be responsible for reproductive 
failure and population deterioration (Whipple, this volume). 

o Pollutant discharges from industrial and municipal dis¬ 
chargers, agricultural, and non-profit sources are in¬ 
creasing (Nichols, et at . 1986). 


128 








o Reduction in wetland habitats has eliminated fish nursery 

and waterfowl migration and nesting areas (Josselyn, this 

volume). 

One technique for developing an appropriate research program 
and management scheme for addressing these problems is the sys¬ 
tems analysis approach, which has been used successfully in the 
space prgram. Its procedures are especially useful, since they 
were designed to analyze the organization and interrelationships 
among components of complex systems such as those found in nat¬ 
ural environments. 

Figures 1 and 2 show schematically the processes of formu¬ 
lation and solution of estuarine problems. These, along with 
decision-making, decision implementation, and analysis of differ¬ 
ences between the predicted results and those obtained, are the 
major parts of system methodology for solving multiple prob¬ 
lems. The application of a programmatic approach to organi¬ 
zation of complex systems raises a variety of methodological 
operations related to water resources management and research. 

The first category of operations are those which relate to: 

1) formulation of problems and objectives, i.e., de¬ 
scription of the current conditions or the results of 
scientific investigations; 

2) outlining "the tree of objectives"; 

3) developing a system of water resources management; 

4) creating an operational model of system's functions; 

5) establishing a research program designed to achieve the 
desired objectives; and 

6) implementing the research program. 

Formulation of the problem is particularly important in a 
programmatic approach since it determines the development of 
subsequent investigations. The most appropriate methodology for 
problem identification is based upon the system analysis ap¬ 
proach. According to this methodology, the process of problem 
formulation represents a chain of consecutive analytical and 
synthetic operations (Figure 3): 

1) evaluation and interpretation of the status of the 
ecosystem including description of trends in various 
parameters and their interactions. (Determine objec¬ 
tive) ; 

2) identification of problems and undesirable trends; 


129 


Procedure for formulating Environmental Problems 
of Estuarine Ecosystems 
(San Franc’sco 8ay) 



Figure 1. The scheme of the procedure for formulating environmental problems 
of estuarine ecosystems. (1) flow of information; (2) order of operation and 
flow of information 


130 





























































Problem Solving Procedure 



Figure 2 . The scheme of systems analysis approach related to solving 
environmental problems of the Delta-San Francisco Bay Ecosystem. 


131 




























fU9SYSTCM: KCONOLOQY 


SC3N0KV A%0 £C0LX»; 



III 


IV 


VI 


Economic and ecolof’ca bases of wate 
development and management 

-*---7^- 


■*eograpnic 4 nd Env irorwwenta I LCOn^'c 

ko^owic arx3 economic evaluation 

Structure 0 f cnttrii of of priorities 

the "'V«r Optimal function for water - — — 

estuarine 0 f estuarine deveIooment 

ecosystem system and management 


f undart 
economic basis 
• attr development 
--•-schemes and water 
constr vation 
a 1ternatives 


Economic evaluation of 
•nvironmenta1 resources 
of the ecosystem 

" — • 1 1 f 


Analysis of 
historica1 
trends of water 
development and 
population 
growth 

.:i . .=: 


Eva I uation of water 
factor as a means 
of re gu 1 a 11 on o f 
populations and 
industrial growth 


Determination of critical 
levels of economic 
growth of major water 
users and developers 
if no conservation 
alternatives are 
implemented for conditions 
of 3 - 7 years consecutive 
drought 


Principles of 
economic 
effectivenes s 
of water 
devt1ooment 
related to 
biological toler¬ 
ance of ecosystem 
T 

i 

• 

x 


Probability limits 
of demands for 
water by different 
— (^branches of 
government 
ith restricted 
amounts of natural 
r u nof f 




Integra 1 
bioeconomic 
charactenst ics 
of dynamic 
equ11ibriurn 
between water 
users and water 
developers in 
Cal i forma 


Other Unforeseen Probli 


Cost effective- 
ne ss a^alysu 
of water use by 
d i fferent 
conveyance 
systems aod 
their 

ecologicaI 
impact on 
the Delta 


± 

valuation of the 
fficiency of 
water utilisation 
in various 
industries 
- 1- 


Analysis of the 
economic indices 
and incentives 
related to waterf- 
management in 
d i fferent 
branches of 
industry 


Risk/Benefit 
analysis for: 

- agriculture 

- industry 

- municipa 1 1 1 1 es 

- fisheries 

- recreation 
T 


State's emergency 
water balance 
forecast and its 
economic criteria 
in case of terror¬ 
istic poisoning of 
major water supply 
or of nuclear 
incident 


1 


A1 ternative 
recommendation 



Figure 3. Hierarchy of investigations of the interrelations between ecological 
and economic indices of development in California under various levels of water 
supply for the Delta-San Francisco Bay Ecosystem. 


132 


























































































3) 


development of alternative solutions and techniques for 
modification of negative trends. (Techniques for 
meeting objectives); 

4) assessment of impacts of alternative solutions (Compare 
with objectives); 

5) identification of "best" alternative based on optimal 
use of environmental resources balanced with needs of 
the economy. 

The process starts with investigations of all water re¬ 
sources of the region, their dynamics (under natural and regu¬ 
lated conditions), quality and biological productivity, as well 
as their uses, conservation, and restoration. This makes it 
possible to describe the trends in various dimensions of the 
ecosystem and to define optimal levels of resources utilization. 

Then a long-term forecast begins with water availability 
studies and analysis of water use by various industries, demo¬ 
graphic trends, and recreational needs in this particular re¬ 
gion. Based on a variety of projected levels of water use, fore¬ 
casts are then made of potential impacts of water regulation on 
the quality of the estuarine ecosystem and its living resources 
(e.g., fisheries, wildlife, etc.). The main objective of this 
systems analysis approach is the development of a tentative eval¬ 
uation of long-term trends in water resources. This should then 
make it possible to identify the principal factors responsible 
for these changes and to develop strategies for their mitiga¬ 
tion. Decisions regarding alternative strategies will utimately 
be made through a management system. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently 
assumed a leadership role in this process to "achieve effective 
and cooperative management of the Delta-Bay system and to facili¬ 
tate communication and coordination among and within existing 
management agencies." Their initial step will be to design a 
management structure and decision-making process. In order to 
manage the Delta and San Francisco Bay for the benefit of all 
the citizens of the area, management goals that are agreed upon 
by a wide and representative cross-section must be adopted and a 
research program designed to achieve these goals. 

A likely source of information needed for such management is 
the recently created Aquatic Habitat Institute (AHI) which is 
governed by a board representing regulatory agencies, discharg¬ 
ers, the academic community and the public, and which was de¬ 
signed to produce a "a comprehensive data base for current and 
past research, and master plan for future monitoring and re¬ 
search that assures efficient use of the many ongoing pro¬ 
grams." It is anticipated that the AHI will work closely with 


133 


the EPA to address many of the first year priorities agreed upon 
at EPA's recent San Francisco Bay/Delta Estuarine Management 
Project meeting: identify, locate, coordinate, and disseminate 
existing information on the estuary; identify additional data 
needs; develop quality assurance and quality control measures; 
initiate long-term monitoring; and develop public participation 
and education programs focused on policy goals. 

Scientist, managers, dischargers, and the public must reach 
consensus on this management plan and on the scientific 
questions that need to be answered before the program is 
undertaken. From our perspective, it is clear that the systems 
approach described here can play an important role in organizing 
and understanding this highly complex estuarine system. We are 
hopeful that the EPA and AHI will use it as part of the planning 
and management process. 


Acknowledgements 

This research was supported by grants from the San Francisco 
Foundation/Buck Trust. The authors gratefully acknowledge the 
technical assistance of Douglas Spicher. 


References 


Adams, J., 1982: Discussion of "Bioeconomic models and the 

development of a San Francisco Bay fisheries index." In M. 
Herz and S.M. Creary, eds., 1982 State of the Bay Conference 
Proceedings . The Oceanic Society, San Francisco Chapter, p. 
181. 

Conomos, T., 1977: Introduction. In T. Conomos, ed., San 

Francisco Bay: The Urbanized Estuary . Pacific Div. Amer. 
Assoc, for the Advancement of Science. San Francisco, p. 7. 

Nichols, F.H., 1987: Benthic ecology and heavy metal accumu¬ 
lation. In San Francisco Bay: Issues. Resources. Status, 
and Management . NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar Series 
No. 6. Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA 
Estuarine Programs Office, p. 65-67. 

Nichols, F.H.; J.E. Cloern; S.N. Luoma; and D.H. Peterson, 1986: 

The modification of an estuary. Science . 231:567-573. 

Rozengurt, M.A.; M.J. Herz; and M. Josselyn, 1987: Impact of 

water diversions on the river-bay-estuary-sea ecosystems of 
San Francisco Bay and the Sea of Azov. In San Francisco 
Bay: Issues. Resources. Status, and Management . NOAA 

Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar Series No. 6. Washington, D.C., 
U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Estuarine Programs Office, 
p. 35-62 


134 














Whipple, J.A.; R.B. MacFarlane; M.B. Eldridge; and P. Senville, 
Jr., The impact of estuarine degradation and chronic pol¬ 
lution on populations of anadromous striped bass in the San 
Francisco Bay-Delta: A summary. In San Francisco Bay: 
Issues. Resources. Status, and Management . NOAA Estuary- 
ofthe-Month Seminar Series No. 6. Washington, D.C., U.S. 
Department of Commerce, NOAA Estuarine Programs Office, 
p. 77-107 


135 
































































SHORELINE MANAGEMENT 


Alan R. Pendleton 

Bay Conservation and Development Commission 


I should first point out that other speakers have covered in 
one form or another the scientific points about San Francisco 
Bay that I wanted to make. But, because I am more familiar with 
coastal management issues than problems faced by scientists, and 
to avoid repetition, I will focus on how San Francisco Bay is 
managed. Then I'd like to discuss two recent matters: mitiga¬ 
tion policy and diked historic baylands to help show how science 
does or does not interact well with the coastal manager's needs. 

I would like to give you a little more information about the 
Commission's organization and jurisdiction. The Commission is a 
state agency, but one with only regional jurisdiction over San 
Francisco Bay. There are 27 commissioners. The 13 local re¬ 
presentatives dominate the Commission's decisions. These 
locally appointed commissioners are from the 25 cities and 9 
counties that control territory in or along the Bay. There are 
five state commissioners including representatives from the 
Regional Water Quality Control Board, tbe State Lands Commis¬ 
sion, the State Resource Agency, the State Department of Trans¬ 
portation, and the State Department of Finance. There are five 
commissioners appointed by the Governor, including the Chairman 
and Vice-Chairman. One commissioner is appointed by the Speaker 
of the Assembly and one by the State Senate. There are also two 
Federal representatives: the District Engineer from the San 
Francisco District of the U.S. Corps of Engineers and the Region¬ 
al Administrator for Region 9 of the Environmental Protection 
Agency. It takes 13 affirmative votes to grant a permit and 18 
affirmative votes to adopt or change a policy in the San 
Francisco Bay Plan. 

The McAteer-Petris Act defines the Commission's jurisdiction 
and authority. The jurisdiction includes all areas of the Bay 
from a line westerly of the Golden Gate to a line at the Delta 
that is subject to tidal action, including marshes, salt-ponds, 
managed wetlands and portions of certain tributaries that flow 
into the Bay. There is also jurisdiction over the shoreline for 
the first 100 feet inland from the edge of the Bay. Within this 
area, permits from the Commission are needed for any filling, 
extraction of materials, and substantial changes in use. The 
Commission also has planning responsibilities for the Bay as a 
regional resource of statewide significance. 


137 



The Act was the first comprehensive coastal management law 
in the country. In the 2 0 years it has been in effect, it has 
worked remarkably well. This law instructs the Commission to 
balance the need to preserve the natural values of San Francisco 
Bay with the need to accommodate economic uses of the Bay. 
However, if there is an unavoidable conflict between those 
goals, preservation of the Bay predominates. 

The San Francisco Bay Plan establishes the policies that 
govern the Bay. The 1965 version of the Act charges the 
Commission with preparing a comprehensive plan for the Bay in 
three years. The resulting planning program involved consider¬ 
able research summarized in many technical reports. Some titles 
of these reports may give you some sense of the range of the 
investigation. 

(1) Geology of the Bay; 

(2) Mineral Resources of the Bay; 

(3) Sedimentation Aspects of the Bay; 

(4) Effect of the Bay on Climate; 

(5) Ecological Aspects of the Bay; 

(6) Tides of the Bay; 

(7) Water Pollution and the Bay; 

(8) Regional Organization for Bay Conservation and 
Development; 

(9) Municipal, State and Federal Programs Affecting the 
Bay; and 

(10) Air Transportation of the Bay. 

This is only a sample -- a number of other reports dealt 
with ownership, regulatory authority, recreation, public facili¬ 
ties, barrier proposals, safety of fills, surface transporta¬ 
tion, waterfront housing, waterfront industry, taxation, fund¬ 
ing, and similar matters that affect how the Bay is governed. 

Thus, both the McAteer-Petris Act and the Bay Plan address 
the Bay's resources from a number of points of view. Certainly 
preserving the Bay is the foremost priority in both the law and 
the Plan. Because there were several areas where information 
was lacking and because priorities and values change over time, 
the Legislature instructed the Commission to make a continuing 
review of all aspects of the Bay. Since 1969, the Bay Plan has 
been revised to reflect new information and to adopt new or 
changed policies. The most important planning efforts since 
1970 include the studies that led to the Suisun Marsh Protection 
Plan, the study on dredging in the Bay, the studies that led to 
the Richardson Bay Special Area Plan, the diked historic bay- 
lands study, and the Seaport Plan. In addition to a well 
written law and a comprehensive plan for the Bay, the Bay also 
enjoys strong judicial and public support. 


138 


California is fortunate in having legal precedents that 
support broad regulatory authority -- certainly broader than 
exist in many other states. The California Supreme Court 
generally allows government to wield considerable police 
authority when making land-use decisions. That allows the 
Commission to be a little more aggressive than other commissions 
can be when faced with a choice between man's activities in the 
Bay and the need to preserve the natural values of the Bay. 

The "public trust" doctrine also supports better decisions 
for the Bay. The public trust is a type of public property 
interest in the tidelands and submerged lands of the Bay. It is 
held by the state on behalf of the people and is paramount to 
any private property interests that may also exist. It can be 
thought of as an easement. The Commission is one of the co¬ 
trustees of this public trust. The McAteer-Petris Act is a 
declaration of the Legislature concerning what the public trust 
more specifically means for the Bay. When the Commission is 
acting in its capacity as a co-trustee, it can restrict uses on 
private lands more completely than it could if it were only 
using police power. If you use the police power in a way that 
deprives an owner of his property rights without paying for 
them, you are subject to a lawsuit that may require the agency 
to pay for the land affected by the decision. This possibility 
obviously has a chilling effect on the willingness of govern¬ 
ment to approach the line of an overly restrictive land-use 
decision. But if you are applying public trust principles to 
the land, then you are acting as one of the owners. An owner 
usually has greater control over property than a regulatory 
agency. 

Public opinion supports an unfilled Bay. There is a fairly 
broad consensus among the citizens of the Bay Area that the Bay 
is important, valuable, and deserving of protection. Most Bay 
Area "leaders" recognize that the Bay Area is at a competitive 
disadvantage in comparison to most other regions. For example, 
our ports are disadvantaged in comparison with the deeper 
watered and richer Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, or Seattle. 
Housing costs in the Bay Area are among the highest in the 
country -- that discourages new industry. Chip-based technology 
has been experiencing retrenchment recently due to foreign 
competition and a maturing marketplace. Education and other 
public services have been contracting in the wake of Proposition 
13, which greatly limits public taxing of property. Transpor¬ 
tation is expensive, and roads are jammed and often badly 
maintained. Sewers need replacement in many areas. 


139 


Against these many competitive disadvantages, the Bay 
provides a great amenity and resource. It defines the area as 
special; the water creates vast open space and provides spectac¬ 
ular views. It moderates the climate. It is a great sailing 
Bay. It is a nursery ground for fish. It contains the largest 
contiguous marsh in California, a stopover for many mitigrating 
waterfowl. This resource and the region's other environmental 
advantages are our most important economic asset as well as 
vital to our continued health and welfare. 

Our social and political structure makes it more difficult 
to govern the Bay as a single, interrelated entity. California 
divides resource management by subject matter. There is no 
department of environment or of natural resources. One agency 
regulates air emissions; another controls discharges into the 
Bay; a third decides who may take what freshwater where; a 
fourth regulates fisheries; a fifth administers the state park 
land-use; and a sixth, the Commission, plans for and regulates 
land-use in and along the Bay. Add to this 25 cities with 
councils, administrators, zoning and planning authority and 9 
counties with supervisors, administrators, zoning and planning 
authority. So, special effort must be made in the Bay Area to 
cooperate to assure balance among the various agencies assigned 
to protect natural values. 

Through the 1966-1970 planning period, science always played 
an essential role in defining the resources and describing the 
natural processes. Science has played less of a role recently, 
particularly in the regulatory decisions of the Commission. 

This is because scientific information about the Bay is not or¬ 
ganized comprehensively, because research on the Bay has not 
kept up with efforts made for other important estuaries, because 
some scientific information is readily available in a form that 
is useful to policy-makers and because some essential data about 
the Bay has not been gathered. I believe that during the last 
10 years or so, science has played less of a role in the de¬ 
cisions about the Bay than law, public opinion, politics, and 
economics. 

Lack of comprehensive information, lack of coordination 
among various scientists and organizations doing research on the 
Bay and, failure to provide existing information in a form that 
is useful to managers are the likely reasons science has played 
a smaller role than it should when decisions about the Bay are 
made by the Commission, and I suspect, by other managers of the 
Bay's resources. 

Of course, commissioners vary in their reaction to a situa¬ 
tion in which there may be a threat to the natural values but 
scientists are unable or unwilling to define the extent of the 
threat clearly. In that situation, some commissioners will 
ignore unquantified and unspecific threats. That often means 


140 


that an application is approved or less stringent policy lan¬ 
guage is adopted. An applicant usually has factual support for 
this application and is willing to spend the money and effort it 
takes to produce the scientific information needed. The scien¬ 
tific community is often in that position. Unless scientists 
can provide reasonable assurance that a specific harm will 
result unless a restrictive policy is adopted, the Commission 
may prefer to err on the side of those affected by the 
restriction. 

Recently and frequently for matters before the Commission, 
scientists have said there is little data relevant to the 
question before the Commission. Or they state that the data 
that is available has been brought into question and may not 
provide a reliable basis for a decision. Or they say that the 
only scientific opinion available has been extrapolated from 
other areas which may or may not relate well to the Bay. But 
commissioners must nevertheless decide. If scientists say they 
cannot help much and decisions must be made, the Commission is 
forced to deal with less than a full deck. 

As Mike Josselyn has pointed out, coastal managers must have 
easy access to scientific information. For San Francisco Bay, 
there is a large number of academic and scientific institutions 
that do various types of research on various aspects of the Bay. 
It is not always easy to discover who has what information. We 
need a clearinghouse or scientific forum that can coordinate the 
various studies, share information among scientists, and inform 
managers and the public about research, available data, and new 
conclusions about the Bay. 

As important as providing a clearinghouse, we need scienti¬ 
fic information written for the non-scientist. The non-scien¬ 
tists must be able to understand what the information means and 
must be able to know why the information is important. If the 
information is presented in a way that is too difficult for the 
layman to understand, it is unlikely that decision-makers or the 
public will either appreciate the importance of the research or 
apply it to the decisions they must make. 

Now, I'd like to talk about two specific areas of concern 
the Commission has been working on where science has played an 
important part. First, mitigation. Mitigation means many 
things to different people. For the Commission, mitigation 
means the addition to or restoration of an area to wetland 
value. It does not mean buying out of harm that a project could 
avoid. Nor does it mean that projects that otherwise do not 
meet the requirements of our policies can be approved if mitiga¬ 
tion is provided. A project must first meet the requirements of 
our law and Plan; it must be designed to have the least possible 
adverse will, nevertheless, have adverse impacts on natural 


141 


values of the Bay. Then we require mitigation to offset those 
unavoidable impacts. Federal agencies often refer to this type 
of mitigation as compensation. 

Now determining the adverse impacts of a small amount of 
fill in the Bay, particularly if marshes and mudflats are not 
involved, is very difficult. It is probably impossible to 
quantify precisely such impacts. However, we can reasonably 
assume that the cumulative impacts of several small fills, will 
at some point, affect the natural values of the Bay, even though 
it is difficult to assess the impacts of each small fill. Never¬ 
theless, the best available environmental information must be 
provided, preferably in a document that clearly describes the 
site and project. Certainly biologists, hydrologists, and 
perhaps other scientific specialists should be involved in 
obtaining and evaluating that information. 

When that information shows that there is an adverse impact 
that is unavoidable, it should be offset. Usually, this should 
be done by reopening an area to tidal action or enhancing the 
wetland values of an area that may not be sufficiently flushed 
or drained or may not contain as much diversity of habitat as 
biologists tell us is desirable. We have also found that it is 
crucial to consult with scientists when reviewing plans to 
change an area, particularly if areas are to be reopened to 
tidal action, new wetland vegetation is to be established, or 
other enhancement actions are to be taken. 

Diked historic baylands is another recent study that in¬ 
volved scientific research and opinion. Prior to the Commis¬ 
sion's creation, substantial areas of the bay were diked off. 

Many of these areas were converted to saltponds but many others 
were used for hay growing, grazing, and similar agricultural pur¬ 
poses. These areas retain some wetland values and are often 
quite important for waterfowl and other animals that use both 
the Bay and uplands. Diked baylands are under pressure for 
urbanization. On the other hand, they present the last opportu¬ 
nity to significantly improve the habitat values of the Bay. 

In undertaking the diked historic baylands study, the Com¬ 
mission again turned to the scientific community to discover how 
these areas functioned and what beneficial changes could occur. 
We discovered a great deal about the species that now use the 
areas, about the compatibility of agricultural and wildlife use 
of many of the areas, about the difficulties of modifying such 
areas, and about the flood plain and soil values of these 
areas. Based on the valuable scientific information and 
opinion, the Commission found that diked historic baylands had 
great importance as part of the Bay system and adopted findings 
and policies to use when projects were presented to the Corps. 


142 


Both the mitigation and diked historic bayland examples show 
that governmental regulatory agencies respond well to clear, 
understandable, and applicable scientific information. When the 
information is in a form that the average reader can appreciate, 
there is considerable public and media interest in the Bay Area. 
There is an increased willingness to take the opportunity to 
improve the San Francisco Bay, both through mitigation and 
through increased attention to the diked historic baylands. 


REFERENCES 


Cloern, J.E., and Nichols, F.H., 1985a: Time Scales and 

mechanisms of estuarine variability; synthesis from studies 
of San Francisco Bay. In J.E. Cloern and F.H. Nichols 
(Eds.) Temporal Dynamics of an Estuarv-San Francisco Bay . 
Dordrecht, Netherlands. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, 229-237. 

Cloern, J.E., and Nichols, F.H., 1985b: Temporal Dynamics of an 
Estuarv-San Francisco Bay . Dordrecht, Netherlands. Dr. W. 
Junk Publishers. 

Cronin, L.E. 1967: The role of man in estuarine processes. In: 
G.H. Lauff. (ed.). Estuaries . Washington, D.C., American 
Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication No. 
83, 667-689. 

Cross, R.D., and D.L. Williams, (eds.) 1981: Proceedings of the 
National Symposium on Freshwater Inflow to Estuarine. Vols. 

I and II . Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-81704, Washing¬ 
ton, D.C., U.S. Dept, of the Interior. 

GOIN, 1972: Present and projected water and salt balance of the 
southern seas of the U.A.S.R. Moscow, U.S.S.R. Transactions 
of the Government Oceanographic Institute . (GOIN), No.108 
(In Russian). 

Goldman, E.J., and V.N. Maysky, 1972: Status of Winter-Run 

Chinook Salmon. Onchorhvnchus tshawtscha. in the Sacramento 

River . AFB Office Report. Sacramento, California Depart¬ 
ment of Fish and Game, Anadromous Fisheries Branch. 

Hedgpeth, J.W., 1970. Statement in The Nation's Estuaries: San 
Francisco Bay and Delta . Subcommittee on Government Opera¬ 
tions, House of Representatives , 91st Congress, 2nd Ses¬ 
sion, 361-386. 

Herrgesell, P.L., R.G. Schaffter, and C.J. Larsen, 1983: Ef ¬ 
fects of Freshwater Outflow on San Francisco Bay Biological 
Resources . Sacramento, CA, Department of Fish and Game, 

State of California Technical Report #7. 


143 


















Kelley, D.W. and W.E. Tippets, 1977: Delta outflow and San 
Francisco Bay. A report prepared for the Delta 
Environmental Advisory Committee of the California DWR, 
32pp. 

Kjelson, M.A., Raquel, P.F., and Fisher, F.W., 1982: Life 

history of fall-run juvenile Chinook salmon, Ohcorhvnchus 
tshawvtscha in the Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary, 
California. In V.S. Kennedy, (ed.) Estuarine Comparisons , 
New York, Academic Press, 393-411. 

Kockelman, W.T., T.J. Conomos, and A.E. Leviton (eds.) 1982: 

San Francisco Bav: Use and Protection . San Francisco. 
Pacific Division of the AAAs. 

Krone, R.B., 1979: Sedimentation in the San Francisco Bay 

system. In T.J. Conomos, (ed.) San Francisco Bay: The 
Urbanized Estuary . San Francisco. Pacific Division of the 
AAAs. 85-97. 

Lauff, G.H. (Ed.) 1967: Estuaries . Washington, D.C., American 

Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication No. 
83. 

L'Vovich, M.I., 1974: World Water Resources and Their Future . 
Translation, 1979. American Geophysical Union. 

Makarov, E.H., V.P. Zakutskij, V.V. Guskov, 1982: The assess¬ 
ment of the stock of the Azov Sea-Blac Sea Medusae and 
recommendations for their utilization in the national 
economy. In Biological Productivity in the Azov and 
Caspian Seas . Ministry of Fisheries of the U.S.S.R., 

Moscow, VNIRO, 107-113 (In Russian). 

Mann, K.H., 1982: Ecology of Coastal Waters. A Systems 

Approach . Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. 

Mancy, K.H., 1979: The Aswan High Dam and Its Environmental 
Implications . Nairobi, Kenya. Socita Internationalis 
Limnologiae Workshop on Limnology of African Lakes. 
December, 1979. 

Marti, U.U., and Musatov, A.D., 1973: Management of water 

regimes is responsible for the success of fisheries. In: 
The Problems of Regulation and Use of Water Resources . 

Moscow, Nauka (Science) 179-192. 

Meleshkin, M.T., 1981: Ecological Problems of the World Oceans . 
Moscow, Economics, 279pp. 

Meleshkin, M.T., Rozengurt, M.A. and Tolmazin, D.M., 1973: The 
problems and methods of improving efficiency of use of 


144 



















water resources of the Sea of Azov basin: economic and 
hydrological aspects. ODESSA Journ. The Problems of the 
Economy of Sea and the World Ocean . Ac. of Sci., UKSSR V. 

2. 3-15. 

Meyer Resources, 1985: The Economics Value of Striped Bass, 

Morone saxatilis, Chinook salmon. Oncorhvncus tshawvtscha, 

and Steelhead Trout. Salmo gairdneri. of the Sacramento and 

San Joaquin River Systems . Sacramento, CA. Dept, of Fish 
and Game, Anadromous Fisheries Branch, Administrative 
Report No. 85-3. 

Kockelman, W.T., T.J. Conomos, and A.E. Leviton (eds.) 1982: 

San Francisco Bay: Use and Protection . San Francisco. 
Pacific Division of the AAAs. 

Krone, R.B., 1979: Sedimentation in the San Francisco Bay 

system. In T.J. Conomos, (ed.) San Francisco Bay: The 
Urbanized Estuary . San Francisco. Pacific Division of the 
AAAs. 85-97. 

Lauff, G.H. (Ed.) 1967: Estuaries . Washington, D.C., American 

Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication No. 
83. 


L'Vovich, M.I., 1974: World Water Resources and Their Future . 
Translation, 1979. American Geophysical Union. 

Makarov, E.H., V.P. Zakutskij, V.V. Guskov, 1982: The assess¬ 
ment of the stock of the Azov Sea-Black Sea Medusae and 
recommendations for their utilization in the national 
economy. In Biological Productivity in the Azov and 
Caspian Seas . Ministry of Fisheries of the U.S.S.R., 

Moscow, VNIRO, 107-113 (In Russian). 

Mann, K.H., 1982: Ecology of Coastal Waters. A Systems 

Approach . Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. 

Mancy, K.H., 1979: The Aswan High Dam and Its Environmental 
Implications . Nairobi, Kenya. Socita Internationalis 
Limnologiae Workshop on Limnology of African Lakes. 
December, 1979. 

Marti, U.U., and Musatov, A.D., 1973: Management of water 

regimes is responsible for the success of fisheries. In: 
The Problems of Regulation and Use of Water Resources . 

Moscow, Nauka (Science) 179-192. 

Meleshkin, M.T., 1981: Ecological Problems of the World Oceans . 
Moscow, Economics, 279pp. 


145 
























Meleshkin, M.T., Rozengurt, M.A. and Tolmazin, D.M., 1973: The 
problems and methods of improving efficiency of use of 
water resources of the Sea of Azov basin: economic and 
hydrological aspects. ODESSA Journ. The Problems of the 
Economy of Sea and the World Ocean . Ac. of Sci., UKSSR V. 
2. 3-15. 


Meyer Resources, 1985: The Economics Value of Striped Bass, 

Morone saxatilis. Chinook salmon. Oncorhyncus tshawvtscha, 

and Steelhead Trout. Salmo qairdneri. of the Sacramento and 

San Joaquin River Systems. Sacramento, CA. Dept, of Fish 

and Game, Anadromous Fisheries Branch, Administrative 
Report No. 85-3. 

Moyle, P.B., 1976: Inland Fishes of California . Berkeley, 
University of California Press. 

Nichols, F.H., J.E. Cloern, S.N. Luoma, and D.H. Peterson, 1986: 

The modification of an estuary. Science . 231:567-573. 

Officer, C.B., 1976: Physical Oceanography of Estuaries (and 
Associated Coastal Waters ). New York, J. Wiley & Sons. 

Orlob, G.T., 1977: Impact of upstream storage and diversions on 
salinity balance in estuaries. Estuarine Processes . V. 2. 

Ac. Press, 3-17. 

Remisova, S.S., 1984a: Water balance of the Sea of Azov. 

Journal of Water Resources . 1:109-121. 

Remisova, S.S., 1984b: Salt balance of the Sea of Azov. 

Journal of Water Resources . 3:9-14. 

Rozengurt, M.A., 1971: Analysis of the impact of the Dniester 
River regulated runoff on the salt regime of the Dniester 
Estuary. Kiev, Scientific Thought . Ac. of Sci., U.S.S.R., 
132pp. Library of Congress GB2308.B55R69. 

Rozengurt, M.A., 1974: Hydrology and prospects of reconstruc¬ 
tion of natural resources of the north-western part of the 
Black Sea estuaries. Kiev. Scientific Thought . Ac. of 
Sci., U.S.S.R., 224pp. Library of Congress GB2308.B55R69. 

Rozengurt, M.A., 1983a: On environmental approach to protecting 
estuaries from salt intrusion. In O.T. Magoon and H. 

Converse (eds.) Coastal Zone .83: Proceedings of the Third 
Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management, Vol. III .. New 
York. American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 2279-2293. 

Rozengurt, M.A., 1983b: The Environmental Effect of Extensive 

Water Withdrawals on the River-Estuarv-Sea Ecosystem, Part 

II . Sacramento, CA, State of California Resource Agency, 
Department of Water Resources, 157pp. 


146 






















Rozengurt, M.A. and I. Haydock, 1981: Methods of computation 
and ecological regulation of the salinity regime in estu¬ 
aries and shallow seas in connection with water regulation 
for human requirements. In R.D. Cross and D.L. Williams 
(Eds.). Proceedings of the National Symposium on Freshwater 
Inflow to Estuaries. Vol. II . Washington, D.C. U.S. Dept, of 
Interior, 474-506. 

Rozengurt, M.A. and M.J. Herz, 1981: Water, water everywhere, 
but just so much to drink. Oceans . 14:65-67. 

Rozengurt, M.A. and Tolmazin, D.M., 1974: The conflict between 
energetics and nature. Kiev, Science and Society . No. 10, 

6-9. 


Skinner, J.E., 1962: An Historical Review of the Fish and 

Wildlife Resources of the San Francisco Bay Area . Sacra¬ 
mento, CA. Department of Fish and Game, Water Projects 
Branch, Report #1. 

Smith, S.E., and S. Kato, 1979: The fisheries of San Francisco 
Bay: Past, present, and future. In Conomos, T. (ed.) San 

Francisco Bay: The Urbanized Estuary . San Francisco. 

Pacific Division of the AAAs. 

Sokolov, A.A. and T.G. Chapman (eds.) 1974: Methods for Water 
Balance Computations . Paris. UNESCO Press. 

Stevens, D.E., 1977: Striped Bass (Mprone saxatilis) year class 
strength in relation to river flow in the Sacramento-San 
Joaquin estuary, California. Transactions of the American 
Fisheries Society . 106:34-42. 

Striped Bass Working Group, 1982: The Striped Bass Decline in 
the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary . Sacramento, CA. 
California State Water Resources Control Board. 

Sutcliffe, W.H., Drinkwater, K., and Muir, B.S. 1977: Correla¬ 
tions of fish catch and environmental factors in the Gulf of 
Main J. Fish Res. Bd. Can. 34:19-30. 

Therriault, J.C. and Levasseur, M. 1986: Freshwater runoff con¬ 
trol of the spatio-temporal distribution of phytoplankton in 
the lower St. Lawrence Estuary (Canada). 251-260pp. 

Skreslet, S. (ed.) The role of freshwater outflow in coastal 

marine ecosystems. NATO Series G: Ecological Sciencies, Vol. 
7. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 

Tolmazin, D.M., 1985: Changing coastal oceanography of the 
Black Sea. In M.V. Angel and R. Smith (Eds.) Progress in 
Oceanography. Vol 15 . New York, Pergamon Press, 217-276. 


147 










































' 
















THE FEDERAL ROLE IN THE MANAGEMENT OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY 


Betsy Coombs 

Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 

I recently had the opportunity to brief the EPA's new 
Assistant Administrator for Water on San Francisco Bay. I 
showed him slides of the Bay, talked about declining fish 
populations, reviewed the history of fisheries decline, and 
talked about siltation and long-term degradation of the Bay. 
During a helicopter tour of the Bay, he turned and said, "The 
Bay looks so healthy!" 

His reaction is not uncommon. Many of us who grew up on the 
Bay are used to the idea that there are no booming fisheries on 
the Bay. At one point, San Francisco Bay was the most important 
fishery on the West Coast. 

Despite the lack of visible causes, there are very real 
problems contributing to the decline on the Bay, many of which 
have been touched on today. For the first time, there is the 
real possibility the EPA may receive management funds for what 
we in the region recognize is a resource of national signifi¬ 
cance, one that deserves our attention. The budget for such an 
undertaking may be $12 million, as some members of Congress have 
sought,...or it may be zero, or somewhere in between. We do not 
know if our equipment will be a handful of pencils or a Prime 
computer. 

We are at the mercy of The Office of Management and Budget 
and other people's priorities: the Congress, the State Water 
Resources Control Board, the Office of Management and Budget and 
the Reagan Administration. Within the next four to six months, 
our sense of what the San Francisco Bay Project might be could 
change by orders of magnitude and in more than one direction, 
and maybe more than once or twice. But one fact is clear: EPA 
Region 9 has a commitment to address the problems of San Fran¬ 
cisco Bay. 

With that introduction, I would like to talk about EPA's 
statutory role on the Bay, the Agency's relationship with other 
agencies, and the establishment of EPA's National Estuaries Pro¬ 
gram through the creation of the Office of Marine and Estuarine 
Protection. 


149 



Much of EPA's mandated role affecting the Bay is given under 
the authority of the Clean Water Act of 1972. The Agency is 
required to respond, case-by-case, to programs outlined in the 
Act. The following five programs represent the majority of 
EPA's activity on the Bay: 

1) Under specific sections of the Clean Water Act, the EPA 
is centrally involved in water quality management plan¬ 
ning. These activities are at the core of the basic 
intent of the Act, which is to enhance water quality 
and protect the public health and welfare. Section 106 
allocates funds to the state for water pollution con¬ 
trol programs. Section 208 provided areawide water 
quality management planning, and now Section 205(j) 
allocates funds for specific studies and specific 
problems for state water quality planning. These 
programs provide important information used in setting 
water quality standards, suggesting needed legislation, 
and developing basin plans. 

2) Under Section 303, EPA requires that the state, through 
the State Water Resources Control Board, develop water 
quality standards to protect the beneficial uses of Bay 
waters. The state and regional boards, with public 
participation, determine those designated beneficial 
uses to be attained and maintained. Those uses rele¬ 
vant to the Bay are: municipal and industrial water 
supplies, habitat for aquatic life, agriculture, and 
waterways for shipping and recreation. The state has 
set salinity standards for the delta and delegated the 
setting of all other standards to the Regional Board. 
Given that toxic pollution appears to contribute to the 
declining health of the Bay, new numeric criteria need 
to be established to augment the existing narrative 
standards. 

Under Section 301, effluent guidelines are established 
for all industrial and municipal dischargers based on 
Best Practicable Technology and are subject to the 
standards just described. 

3) Under Section 402, and subject to EPA approval, the 
state issues National Pollution Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) permits to all dischargers through the 
Regional Water Quality Control Board. These permits 
are the legal basis for requiring dischargers to con¬ 
trol the pollutant levels in their effluent. They 
specify allowable levels and quality of the waste 
discharge through setting specific effluent guidelines 
and receiving water standards. Dischargers are moni¬ 
tored to determine whether they are meeting their per¬ 
mit conditions and to ensure that expected water qual¬ 
ity improvements are achieved. EPA's role here has 


150 


been both carrot and stick; over the past 14 years, the 
EPA has provided nearly $1.3 billion to San Francisco 
Bay for construction grants for sewage facilities in 
the Bay area, granted under Section 201. State and 
local agencies have provided the 25 percent match. 

4) Under Section 404 of the Act, the Army Corps of Engi¬ 
neers, subject to EPA's review, issues dredge and fill 
permits. A permit must be denied if the request does 
not meet the series of tests set forth in Section 404. 

In regard to San Francisco Bay, 404 activity relates to 
the protection of seasonal wetlands, most of which are 
diked. As Michael Josselyn stated earlier, 95 percent 
of the Bay and Delta wetlands have already been filled 
or diked. EPA requires that all efforts be made to 
avoid filling any more wetlands. At the very least, 
there must be no net loss, meaning that other land may 
be restored to wetland. A major problem on the Bay, 
however, is that there is no mitigation land available. 
The so-called "available land" may be held for $300,000 
to $400,000 per acre, clearly an unrealistic option. 

5) EPA, under the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA), must review and comment on all Environmental 
Impact Statements (EISs) which are required for any 
agency constructing a Federal project. In contrast to 
Clean Water Act mandates described above, which are 
media-specific, NEPA provisions are project-specific 
where water issues are just one aspect under considera¬ 
tion. On the Bay, EPA's role includes reviewing EISs 
for construction of municipal sewer facilities, Army 
Corps of Engineers proposals for navigation improve¬ 
ments, and Bureau of Reclamation projects to develop 
water supplies. 

These five areas, under the Clean Water Act and NEPA, re¬ 
presents EPA's primary responsibility on the Bay. As you have 
noticed, each of these programs is a site-specific, project-spe¬ 
cific response to an action. What is missing is an understand¬ 
ing of the whole -- how all of these pieces fit into a larger 
context. 

Mike Josselyn asked me to speak specifically to the rela¬ 
tionship between EPA and other Federal agencies actively in¬ 
volved in the management of the Bay. EPA interacts in a formal 
capacity with two Federal agencies: the Army Corps of Engineers 
in the 404 dredge and fill permits process described previously 
and the U.S Coast Guard on oil and hazardous waste spills 
through EPA's Emergency Response Team. EPA also reviews EISs 
submitted by any agency. 


151 


In addition, EPA currently works in a joint research venture 
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to map the Bay's wet¬ 
lands. Results from this project will help us to monitor 
changes in Bay wetlands over time, providing better control and 
protection over that fragile 5 percent of the Bay's marshes and 
seasonal wetlands that still remain. 

Other agencies have carried out research on the hydrology, 
chemistry, and biology of the Bay. Dominant among these, the 
U.S. Geologic Survey has played a most significant role in 
fleshing out our understanding of the Bay. 

In summary, however, the primary responsibility for the 
management of the Bay has been delegated to the State of 
California, subject to EPA review under the four Clean Water Act 
programs just described. Water guality standards, compliance 
and monitoring, and construction grants are the primary lines of 
defense for maintaining beneficial uses. As with the EPA, so 
too must the state respond case-by-case, project-by-project. As 
the EPA considers a management program for the Bay, it is clear 
that success will depend on good coordination with state 
agencies. 

At the national level, the Environmental Protection Agency 
has made a formal commitment to the protection of estuaries and 
bays through the establishment of the Office of Marine and Estu¬ 
arine Protection, or OMEP, headed by Tudor Davies. Unlike many 
other natural features which readily fit together under a single 
national program, estuaries reguire a more holistic approach 
involving the expertise, resources, and commitment of many 
agencies. 

We have all learned a lot today about particular characteris¬ 
tics of the Bay. Any program claiming to address the health 
problems of this Bay must be carefully designed to meet its 
unigue mix of problems. By creating OMEP, EPA has recognized 
the multi-disciplinary nature of estuaries, and developed a 
flexible organizational structure which can be altered to meet 
the unigue needs of each estuary. 

Using the Chesapeake Bay Program as a model, OMEP has de¬ 
signed an overall strategy for the implementation of estuarine 
management programs which may be used for all significant bays. 
There are five steps in their strategy: 

(1) Set up a committee structure to bring in all of the 
vested interested in the Bay; 

(2) Identify and reach consensus on the problems and goals 
of the program; 


152 


(3) 


Implement a data management program to collect all 
available data bases in one system and make the results 
available to all Bay researchers; 

(4) Identify data gaps and conduct needed research to 
develop a comprehensive understanding of the estuary; 
and 

(5) Adopt a management plan for the restoration of the 
estuary. 

It is useful here to note that EPA can undertake this 
management role successfully with no new legislation; our 
current authority is sufficient. 

Under the leadership and guidance of OMEP, three programs 
have been started in the east -- Long Island Sound, Narragansett 
Bay, and Buzzards Bay, as many of you are aware. The program 
has moved westward in introducing a program on Puget Sound. If 
given the opportunity, EPA Region 9 stands ready to implement 
such a program for the San Francisco Bay and Delta Bay, and we 
would look to OMEP for guidance through their established track 
record on the five other estuaries. 

You have heard a good deal today on the research that has 
been done to understand specific aspects of the Bay system. 
Resarch has revealed problems in the Bay, symptoms that reflect 
complex interrelationships that have not been well defined. 
Nowhere is there an overview of the Bay system as a whole. The 
Bay needs a team effort and the commitment of agencies to work 
together in understanding their estuarine ecosystem and 
implementing a management plan to protect it. We at EPA are 
excited about being a central part of this effort, and we look 
forward to working with the many agencies and organizations that 
have played a critical role on the Bay and that have a stake in 
its future. 


153 



























' 








CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION 


ROGER B. JAMES, EXECUTIVE OFFICER 

The State of California's water quality management system is 
unique, has a relatively long history and frequently amazes 
those that visit us from other states and countries. The system 
for managing wastes in the San Francisco Bay Area includes over 
100 counties, cities, and special districts responsible for 
sewerage service with the State providing the regulatory 
framework for protection of surface and ground waters. 

During the mid-1960s, the State undertook a comprehensive 
study of San Francisco Bay and the Delta systems to develop a 
long-range plan for management of the Bay Area's municipal and 
industrial wastes and agricultural drainage from the Central 
Valley. This study recommended ocean disposal of the Bay Area's 
wastes after primary treatment at a facility in San Mateo 
County, numerous studies to assess the biostimulatory and toxic 
impacts of waste discharges, and a regional agency to implement 
the long-range plan. Opposition to the plan and concern about 
the loss of local authority led to 13 subregional planning 
studies controlled by the agencies responsible for sewerage 
service. A number of joint power authorities were formed to 
conduct the studies and construct over $2 billion in treatment 
facilities and deepwater outfalls into the Bay system. 

The California Regional Water Quality Board-San Francisco 
Bay Region (RWQCB) is the State Agency with the responsibility 
for the protection of surface and ground water quality in the 
nine Bay Area counties. The RWQCB has been in operation since 
1950 and is one of nine such agencies in the State of California 
with the authority and responsibility to implement the State 
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and the Federal Clean 
Water Act (FWCA). 

The RWQCB operates under statewide policies of the State 
Water Resources Control Board (SWQCB) which provides budget 
control, considers appeals of RWQCB actions, adjudicates the 
State's water rights programs, and administers the Federal con¬ 
struction grant program. The RWQCB implements its responsibl- 
iities through four fundamental programs: basin planning, waste 
discharge requirements including the Federal NPDES permits sur¬ 
veillance and monitoring and enforcement. 

The nine members of the RWQCB are appointed by the Governor 
for staggered four year terms which provides for relative inde¬ 
pendence and continuity of actions. The RWQCB is supported by a 


155 




full-time technical staff responsible for implementation of its 
policies and regulations. The RWQCB's independence combined 
with a requirement that all planning and regulatory decisions be 
made in public following quasi-judicial hearings to assure a 
degree of consistency and predictability and has resulted in a 
high degree of public acceptance of its decisions. 

People living in the San Francisco Bay have a very strong 
environmental awareness and concern about the pollution of 
ground water and San Francisco Bay. In spite of earlier testi¬ 
mony at this seminar, the greatest public concern is with ground 
water contamination problems in the Silicon Valley from leaking 
underground tanks. In this area, there are 120 sites where 
solvents have contaminated ground water and over 3 00 motor fuel 
tanks with leaking gasoline tanks. The RWQCB regulates over 450 
discharges including 43 major municipalities, 19 major indus¬ 
tries, and 16 onsite and offsite discharges are non-hazardous 
waste landfills, smaller municipalities and industries and agri¬ 
cultural operations. In addition to these discharges, there are 
115 dairies and 15 wineries regulated through an exempting 
process. 

POLICY AND MANAGEMENT DECISIONS 


A number of major policy and management decisions have 
influenced water quality control and beneficial uses in the Bay 
area and perhaps the most significant was the political decision 
in the late 1960s to not form a regional agency with the author¬ 
ity to implement Bay-Delta Plan. The next critical decision 
influencing the Bay was the 1972 amendments to the FWCA that 
mandated best available technology for treatment of municipal 
and industrial wastes. These requirements combined with the 
availability of State and Federal construction grants up to 
87 1/2 percent for local agencies resulted in the consolidation 
of 82 municipal treatment plants into 49 large systems with 
upgraded treatment. Over one-third of the total municipal flow 
now receives tertiary treatment achieving a 70 percent reduction 
since 1960 in the wasteloading of conventional pollutants such 
as BOD, SS, and oil and grease in spite of a 100 percent 
increase in flow. The extreme South Bay has experienced the 
most dramatic reduction of over 90 percent of these pollutants. 
The record for major industries is even more impressive with 
volumes of flow reduced by three-fourths and conventional 
pollutants reduced by over 95 percent since 1960. Although 
comparative data is limited, there is evidence that the dis¬ 
charge of toxic pollutants, such as heavy metals and organic 
chemicals, have been significantly reduced from both industries 
and municipalities. Heavy metal loadings estimated at 8 million 
pounds a year in the 1960s have reduced by over 90 percent. 


156 



Other major decisions that have affected the protection of 
San Francisco Bay and the adjacent wetlands have been the 
formation of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission 
that limited further filling of the Bay; the RWQCB's support of 
State and Federal fisheries agencies policies regarding "no net 
loss of wetlands in the regulation of landfills;" the Citizens 
for a Better Environment pressure to implement the Federal 
pretreatment programs to reduce toxic materials discharged to 
municipal sewerage systems; and the RWQCB's pursuit of best 
management practices to prevent the spill of petroleum products 
during vessel transfer operations. 

These decisons have resulted in the re-establishment of 
beneficial uses such as the opening of 1 mile of shoreline in 
San Mateo County for the public harvesting of shellfish in 1982, 
1983, and 1985 for the first time since the 1930s; the consid¬ 
eration of commercial oyster and clam farming along the East Bay 
shoreline; and, the extreme South Bay, once grossly polluted, 
now supports a commercial bait shrimp fishery and there are 
reports of sturgeon and striped bass being caught. Less subtle 
improvements have been the increased water clarity and reduced 
bacterial levels along the San Francisco shoreline as a result 
of the reduction of wet weather raw sewage combined sewer 
overflows from 80-100 to several each year. 

Many of these management decisions were mandated by the 
FWPCA, were made possible as a result of the availability of 
sewage construction grants and resulted from the public's con¬ 
cern about gross pollution caused by such incidents as oil 
spills. Although there have been success stories as a result of 
these management decisions, there is growing concern about toxic 
discharges to the Bay; impacts on non-point sources such as 
urban runoff, dredging, and spoil disposal; agricultural drain¬ 
age containing selinium and pesticides; and impacts of further 
diversions of freshwater which is considered to be necessary for 
the maintenance of a balanced estuarine system. 

WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT NEEDS 


The water quality management needs of San Francisco Bay are 
numerous and varied ranging from completion of the already plan¬ 
ned improvements to waste water facilities to basic research on 
those factors affecting Bay water quality. The City and County 
of San Francisco need to construct approximately $400 million in 
sewer system improvements to complete essential elements of its 
Master Plan and the East Bay Cities are faced with expenditures 
up to $750 million to upgrade the sewer systems to reduce raw 
sewage overflows. 


157 



The greatest need is to significantly expand and better 
coordinate the data collection, analysis, long-term monitoring 
and research conducted on the Bay. An adeguate and consistent 
funding source has been the major problem in meeting this need 
and the Bay Area citizens must provide this funding source 
independent of State and Federal funding which are too variable 
and subject to budget constraints. 

The second most important need is to establish an insti¬ 
tution with a core of experts doing basic and long-term research 
on the Bay. It is essential that the institution have the abil¬ 
ity to coordinate all research efforts in the Bay as well as 
maintain a knowledge of current research underway in similar 
estuaries throughout the world. This institute should be funded 
and be capable of responding to and investigating the causes of 
incidents such as the Mesodinium Rubrum blooms that occurred 
during the late 1960s and the San Pablo Bay Cladophora bloom in 
1979. The institute should also provide expert testimony to the 
SWRCB and RWQCB to assist in their regulatory decisions. The 
Aquatic Habitat Institute established by the SWRCB is the most 
viable organization to satisfy this need. 

The third major need is to establish a system or mechanism 
to span the information gap between the research/data collection 
efforts and the public's knowledge on the condition of the Bay. 

The Bay Area problems listed water pollution as second only be¬ 
hind transportation. One of the most difficult questions faced 
by the RWQCB staff is the condition of the Bay and what actions 
are needed to protect the Bay. 

The list of resource management needs are virtually endless 
and the potential for public harvest of shellfish is just one 
example of a beneficial use that can be expanded. 

The greatest regulatory management need is the development 
of water quality based standards for species indigenous to the 
Bay, including the most sensitive. The technology based 
standards mandated by the FWPCA have been implemented in the Bay 
Area, yet there is growing evidence that these standards are 
inadequate to protect beneficial water uses identified by the 
RWQCB. We must rapidly move forward to develop these standards 
based on the best available information. 

In summary, considerable progress has been made during the 
past 25 years to reduce pollutants discharged into San Francisco 
Bay in response to the California Water Code and FCWA; however, 
there is evidence that the San Francisco Bay system and benefi¬ 
cial uses are stressed and adversely impacted. Toxics in muni¬ 
cipals and industrial discharges, non-point source discharges, 
water diversions, pollutant input from the Delta, dredging, and 
toxic spills are factors that affect San Francisco Bay. 


158 


One major problem in assessing the relative importance of 
these factors is a fundamental lack of understanding of the 
complex relationships between pollutant discharges, Delta out¬ 
flow, and the health of the biological community of San Fran¬ 
cisco Bay. This lack of understanding, rather than shortcomings 
in the law or its implementation, is now the major impediment to 
the RWQCB in carrying out its mandate to protect the quality of 
the waters of San Francisco Bay. 

The solution to this problem is a sustained program of 
research on the physical, chemical, and biological processes 
that affect the Bay. 


159 


































































302 91 











<1 l fi 




n> xv *© -* 

^ ^ ^ , *. ** < 

V-V^ O 
c..n z 


,»o, V*-'”' 5 ' 


. 'J\ o 

.A %. % 

* ^ rp ° 

» /“CT o ,> ov 

v ^ *^fe’*° ??X * 

,%V °° V^> "° * 

V 


o°^;>:v • >;^:\" ’ >v^. 

*• # I'/^rJ* <t -O o <^$w% ^ 7 <£, << / 7 'JXX'X •* '>X 0 * > 

* J^-fX a 0 V S“£.\ * /*0 * J^tVisfV, » 

** \c& :0k% i^ak**- ***** fi§% * s ^* 

j o i§s&i z <&\ ^4fw : * lisf* * <& \ 

j° • * ’ o°% 



r>v.. v^v 0 ,. o \ 

V s *'“4 c* ,<r ' 

^ «*&$£*** v 1 <v" '’VWp 

^ u 1 ®^ * ■J'o cfs «. MMm o 


» /‘O' 

* ^°<o 

'V.. v**»>v' 

p X ** ^ A * 

O VV" o 
z 


- ^ r°V 

«r "w . O * 

. « *■ 

* r /*o 

0 xSPo * 
a „a o -' 


„ n», 


<*• iVyy/tS^ O >> O j> « 

^ ^ ^ <? Ta AT®’ 


» 1 


■ ° V//Mv * » i;®! ; 47 v, ° tf// 

X, o n/^^s\K a, V V> . w * </y ^ ^ tv 

»* ^ o\§m- stmt** •*} 




o V-S 4 u 

* c 3 «^ % * 

* Oy V 




S . ^ ^ 

'. \& *imtJ R v ,° 

,... • ...v- -a. • • ,v-y>^- -54 

"o :mk* \<P ?mm\ ^ " 

_ 

» V? 

</ <v ' 


^ o° \*> 

> «p v 

A <y ^} 


w cr v 

. w . 

» ^-Rt. • 

A V ^ Co **. 




% '■' • * s ’ v 0 « <■< «, 0 4 v'° * A aX^ 

<• vf* ,0 .^ ^ O-v .-^ j> 

J* O ,< dr^VTz * ° 4 < A 

* w : ■ 

* 0 0 / * 



* ^ov^ 

-_, o V 0-A 

<^ v ’ c n 0 o % v 

s * ,» ,. 4* 0 V ° N ° 4 o^ ^A, 

» ^ j&qubb^* ^ 

o 
z 
o 

I. o 


4\ v ° mm \ '**# 

® ^•'a ®w#» 4 v ^ *Wi»* ^ Vj 

o<. >•>.« V° • -° n =a\ • ’ f oV 

!L ' i0$ht\ *o$ ’Vg 

-aO. o o <Oy> !. 0 3 °/. 

4 <j_^ cx * O o xu t- - v 

;4 »»„ * $ s" ;A' S ‘ / 



* ^Tpc^ r x>i ,. iy 

=» ^ V IraF* ^ '<$X » 

v ] r 


^ <y^ * £ v" o 

0 ^»oho 9 *^P , dQ ^*»n °4, *»D*oO 

Cv V °A ^> V S b r <V (A 4 

\\ / 4¥r \ ^ ^ 

* A cf> r f>:W/7h. ° AA O Jjii.tiA' _ 4 A 

<. ^TTo'a^. 

■V /.cA o°x 

A V ^ A ' ^Wl'- tc. «° ^ 


c7 J j> o 

* A V 



. >ov^ « 
o v O^ t 


’vTC? 

'j C3 •VJ* <S^ 
vVv 1 > 4 X ^ 

O- y , "fc A 

V cP\*'^L<°o 

' %,A° 0 


V aT^ 41 

. • / ov !> ° 
o t 

O ^*» *. 






T x 

%4 ' 

\# «§mt>\ «o$ o^&k* -i 


%,s 




& , \ * 


l w 
n 


O >0^ 


’k' r> a v o <? >, 


A^n .<<T. . t V 3 Z« * .X 



^ - 
4><0 o 


® '40' » 

* ^ ° M/j^sN^jr <i>' 'A 

■-j. %„ ,* as t 

,V •.% cpX- 

- ^ o^SW: •f/-o i . 

£°+ \ 

v ~- - . O •oJ‘ > e o ^ a " i '“ i 

^ffn o' 4, Xi, ^ouo' 5 

40- ; W*\</ /A” p o %& \/ 

’/V" * ’ oO^-^>o 0 '“ ° ‘‘/.^‘.V ' ’ o°*tx“A°o° * k A c °-'- 

^ *tr%6U&J 1 ^ O V"^T<- n° h> *y CX n° X- 

^ * o A ^/ 9 '-» ^ ^«,s * * ^Ao/ 0S °^ ^ d °^ ^/ 9M ° V V ° S °lp^ ^ ft °^ V 

~ ‘ o 0 -W;\/ MV M\/ 

•• s /*7.>'”“' - 

O "0 ■ /v ^ 2 " 



>o N 


k w. : A m*/\““W‘ ; A • 

,\“ 5 K A^r*/V" ° ’ »;-a\° * 


° *°<u <yp* • 

J» ^ \>sV^2r ^ ('“N * C<* K? C\ S' vjvVsA— ^ , 

*>».«’ /,,„ V'^'V' .. % ""“X 00 ^° 

(T' V* > 11 O* % * * 7" » O* ^ 

V, ^ .V§§V-x ^ ,-^ X X ' 

'Kr<? - xMrnk ° v-v o <4p-Vl r 

“ ^ - 
s' ' x ~' u "- ^ ^ * 




% ~0 ,A~* « 

W ° 

S°^ t 

* Q 0 \x 

r anO° ^ 


<y V 


^r o v % Xy 
■; %<? . 

V* /°<* * 

❖ s> CV 


J tj V]/ ✓^^Sy\J V js <A?^ r ^C/> ^'V V ) O 

X'° * * ; iv: )z£\ 

*>- "bv^ °«S»' *Ar>* :&*&' 


Us < ^ 


V, 0 ** 

V> S 

v*o * 

/■ J- - . * AO^ ° 

° o’|j||l* r XX 

° A cJj J JV o 

\»,%v ^ ^ 

^V'o.i'-O „,. <A J ••* A° 

w ^ 0-. dV c° N g ^ v. q» 

„ ^ cP, 



>, », 
'„<> 

° V' 

« ,S SJ J 

A. S' 

■S' 


<, LI i 


•? fc>/Y~~ 

-. . W - • ^,__- -- 

* ^Va * o aP<i - ■» -AO. « £.o aPv, * * AO. 

>' 1 3 1 ^v^**' 1 

:>mh*'. X.J" s*M6k\ * • ■ ■ 


•ei o s 


-_. r VS 

• 1 ^r , ^ 3 ^ , r , A'” • i y. 

nr . ^ O $ fe/ufo2,4 O A A. ^ Va O ❖ fr 3 (r?fcz'i‘ ° .A «,^ 

. ^d 4 . fc fi^»; w ^ :j^p*: ^ ? 

*zsy//ncx/ ° * IpMl^ ° 41 ° ip'V >* 

»* * - ^ 8i, °°/,i - o^ ^v OK °o%o° ^ o %^.„ 

*-»s«Kr» <^ v .x^ V » ©Shr » ^ V ^flSaSP^* ^ 

“•■ 4 V < • • o°^:^\'° ’ 1 * ’ o°V“ u, *^'° ‘ ^ 

•w *§m?-% *o$ ° ^ ° *•• 


\ O 

. ^ « L, flrf 0 ^ y ° 

,0 > O-. 

o 


c ON G 







%** **$■ 'w i&m 


C z *ZiV s *J? o> Ck * rp 

W /Jfe\\c^ ri 


r O N 


“ °.WHm: a>' 


t 

V 4?' O n V ^ 

S ' ■ * \ /kxjfc 

<■ \j» S^ - «, rfU>C/hi ^ 

^ VS 0 - ^S pS^f/. '/y% 0 - y, -j _ 

» <-> .A ^ w. O .<• ’.WrTfc? * O _A V / ^ W O ,■<• Ajff/??- z, * ^ <A r 

: ^ /<-§!&'; .a^*: w X& ^imn V : 

^>°,. .. V»^, 4 0 V;^V °o/Sv \% 

o 



v;^ ; ‘ 

f£mk* : MWz ° 



o 

* y 


«* < v* S" V v . 

- ^ O O 


V A 0 <,/vT7^V° 

C° Nc 4 . <$a CT. 

.A^ W. .cr 4 


<i LI 


>P A - 

V’».'f > c. v’ y w.*.o %,v 

^ <& Qj mO^ -yO ^ 

a^* s & * * r. ^ <5^ ^- s A °jc ^ 

^ ^ a'V » -A^/U*« ' 

o ^11^ * '■ ( jy > «> 

° •> 
n o ^/m\N a, <y 

V) ^ ^ WV 4 Ay 

4> ° « K 



to 

,-to ^ o> o_ v 

^ A <> VTC S S A<r 

■4 ' 0 o - - >*V“?> Sf c o^ 

V « 0i ^»* Ad 4 : 

v v o — ..*v V*.*w* ; y\ ”- 

. v ■• v^p:4>\' ,oko V' v'-\* ? o 'y‘'“' 1 “ - - P%y ,i 

\ xp smci \/ \ c 

5 I mm: a v/ a t eifx ° o ' r 

^ J », 

„ ^ - 0 A -» » „. ~. -,. ,o'.»* ”■« ^ 

'Vd* tim£p\ ■‘b-f ° 

o 

“b 


b'v^v'A.^ % V,°W\^' X/Xffs X % 

,V’ l >.‘r* «S * * cpv ° V’°o a^ . c ir x\ o°V; ^ 


&% 




r . G ❖' 

^V -A ^ 

* ^ O <1 

* ^ 

“ : 0 %t t r xx : 0 a$hi • A, xx z^MfikiX* 
t /\lw; t r^/./\° 5 ®V.y\ -fiGi 

fer^yV ’ >>_r :?\* °‘ ^ • “ w " ^'° '' 


191 


NCHESTER, 
NA 46962 



>w cr ♦’ 
4j.A 




„v 
















